MSU PSA
In recent years, every time the Spartans are mentioned, people are always quick to mention that "Sparty doesn't matter" or "Sparty got lucky." At some point, we have to see this as denial and recognize that Sparty is in fact a good program right now, and a strong rival who currently has the upper hand. Stating that we "don't care" in threads of 180+ posts seems silly and juvenile, and frankly, it serves the opposite purpose that the posters intend.
Bullet points:
1. Dantonio, while a douche, is a good coach whether we like it or not.
2. Dontonio is a massive douchey douche douche
3. MSU at this stage is a more stable program than UM
4. This is becoming a strong rivalry, and I look forward to the future with it
4. Michigan will be back
5. I think Dantonio has changed the tide on the rivalry. Hell people in Ann Arbor are starting to believe him. Never in a million years I would have thought that. Forcing posters into message board denial is a good start.
October 23rd, 2011 at 12:56 PM ^
Ironically, I had just written a post on that and decided not to hit "save". I think that, over time, some of those guys will play to their scouted level. Yes, Dantonio has shown he's good at evaluating talent, but right now I think MSU is playing above it's scouted talent level. If you average that over a decade, there will be some regression to the mean when a 2* plays like a 2*, and not lights out like the guys GBS mentioned.
October 23rd, 2011 at 1:13 PM ^
You could be right. Only time will tell. Your idea places a lot of confidence in the scouting systems, and you know more about that than I do.
But when guys like Cousins and Leveon Bell had very little interest from any major programs - perhaps on account of their low ratings - and then play at the level they've played, and then that script gets replayed over and over again, two things happen for me (perhaps wrongly): (1) I lose confidence in the scouting services; (2) I gain confidence in MD.
October 23rd, 2011 at 3:09 PM ^
Look at Notre Dame and what happened to them last night. Year in and year out they have five-start quarterbacks, five-star receivers, all of this talent, and they perennially underachieve. Look at Florida State. If recruit talent was the only thing the only thing that mattered, Lou Holtz would usually be more or less right about his predictions for ND.
I'm not sure what it is that makes Dantonio so effective. It's not like he's a Rich Rod (at West Virginia, not the way it worked out at Michigan) or Chip Kelly type guy playing moneyball with an innovative spread-and-shred scheme. It's not like he doesn't try to create the same kind of traditional smash-mouth offense and tough defense that other schools do. But he's managed to be effective with it with less recruiting talent.
A lot of people here are very concerned about MSU, and I say this as a Michigan fan, because Dantonio's success is confusing more than anything else. He doesn't come from a school with very much history of success, he wasn't a big-name coach when you hired him, he doesn't stock his classes with four-star and five-star recruits, he doesn't have an innovative scheme on offense, and he's never won a bowl game. His success, in the MGoBlog worldview, is completely inexplicable, but at this point it's undeniable.
October 23rd, 2011 at 3:40 PM ^
Obviously relying on highly touted classes comes with the implicit understanding that coaching is more or less equal. The schools you name all lost coaches due to underperforming in their coaching responsibilities to good athletes.
I don't deny that the evidence shows Dantonio can string together successful seasons (8-9 wins) the way he develops and scouts talent. My point of contention is whether he can continue to do what he's done in 2010 and 2011 (10-11 wins) with the same type of recruits season after season. My answer would be probably not, because just like with 4/5* athletes, some 2/3*'s that Dantonio recruits won't turn into Cousins or Jones. They'll play to how they were scouted by other coaches, and that leaves a hole. Doesn't mean Michigan will exploit it, but between us, Nebraska, OSU or PSU that will be exploited in most years.
The reason Peterson and Patterson are such hot tickets in the coaching world lies in the fact that very, very few people can get "out recruited" and still field elite level teams on a regular basis. Maybe Dantonio can, but the odds seem small.
October 23rd, 2011 at 12:35 PM ^
Fair assessment.
I was a Sophmore at MSU when our last game was against Hawaii to become bowl eligible and we choked that game away and ended the year with 5 wins. After yesterday, we just became bowl eligible in October. In my student days, I had no idea such a concept was even possible.
October 23rd, 2011 at 12:48 PM ^
says that. The averages always come home. Texas will be better than Missouri long term, USC better than Arizona St, Georgia better than Miss St. Doesn't mean the latter programs can't compete in cycles.
October 23rd, 2011 at 11:54 AM ^
WTF is Dontonio ?
October 23rd, 2011 at 12:15 PM ^
People keep going "We Don't Care", but if that was the case, there wouldn't be so many threads about State. There wouldn't be so many posts on those threads. State is good right now and it's bugging people. If we really "don't care", let's move on and talk about beating Purdue this Saturday.
October 23rd, 2011 at 12:15 PM ^
State isn't going anywhere anytime soon. They have become a Wisconsin-level program. Not enough talent to really contend for the MNC, but certainly enough to contend for the B10 most years. They are developing 3 star recruits into impact players (Worthy), getting meh QB recruits to RS & play smart (Kork Coupons).
Their D recruiting has improved a TON over the last 2-3 years to the point where they are replacing 4 star LB talent with the same level recruits. Their DEs are top quality. State will have a very good to great D for the forseeable future.
It's on offense where the OL recuriting has been 'meh' but they have performed weel above expectations. They lose Cunningham and Coupons, but retrun everyone else on the team assuming Worthy returns. Their Rbs are solid and WR is an easy psoition group to replace when you return everyone in the running game.
The big question is, will the QB next year make Sparty miss Cap'n Crunch? Because it's pretty clear the D isn't going anywhere and the rest of the offense returns, save Cunningham.
October 23rd, 2011 at 12:23 PM ^
They lose more than that on offense. Basically every skill-position guy (including the TE) they have involved in their passing game right now is a senior.
October 23rd, 2011 at 12:35 PM ^
| 2007 | Michigan State | 7–6 | 3–5 | T–7th | L Champs Sports |
| 2008 | Michigan State | 9–4 | 6–2 | 3rd | L Capital One |
| 2009 | Michigan State | 6–7 | 4–4 | T–6th | L Alamo |
| 2010 | Michigan State | 11–2 | 7–1 | T–1st | L Capital One |
| 2011 | Michigan State | 6–1 | 3–0 | (Legends) |
1 good season and B10 championship (if you can call it that because they didn't play OSU), 0 BCS bowls, 0 bowl wins,1 double digit win season and they are suddenly wisconsin??
guys wisconsin has been going to the rose bowl on average a couple times a decade under bielema and alvarez.
im very much willing to give sparty their due but a good year last year and a potentially good year this year and all of a sudden they are wisconsin?
October 23rd, 2011 at 12:43 PM ^
you can't be serious can you? "Who cares about the last two years where msu went 11-2 and this year have the chance to do it again, overall under dantonio they haven't been that good!" Makes perfect sense...
edit: plus they've beaten wisconsin two years in a row. That's not an easy thing to do. They absolutely shafted us last year and would absolutely shaft us this year too.
October 23rd, 2011 at 12:50 PM ^
I don't buy the "recruiting is shifting the tide back to us" right now. This is simply a bedtime story generated to make us feel safe at night. The truth? The truth is that we have had the better recruiting classes. Want proof?
[credit Rivals.com]
Ranking by Team by Year
2011: U-M 21, MSU 31
2010: U-M 20, MSU 30
2009: U-M 8, MSU 17
2008: U-M 10, MSU DNR
2007: U-M 12, MSU 42
The meat of their team is made up of guys who know their posittion. Recruiting is not the answer for us, only one part of the equation. Now this wouldn't be fair to present without stating that we are on our 3rd head coach in the same amount of time, and that our offense and defensive schemes have suffered because of it, but we are being beat with lesser talent right now. We can laugh if we want about our 2012 class compared to theirs, but they will probably sign a few more kids and move up into the top 30. That should be more than enough to compete with us and make for an interesting rivalry.
The key to all this for us and them is coaching. We keep ours and so do they. Dantonio puts his teams in a position to win. We need our coaches to do the same. They got it versus Notre Dame, and didn't versus Michigan State. Michigan State was a more winnable game statistically. We lost that game at the end. We had to perform miracles to win Notre Dame. If the strategy in the 4th quarter against MSU was "Denard go do what Denard do" then we probably wouldn't have 80% of the topics on this esteemed blog crying and bitching about a team we claim is inferior.
October 23rd, 2011 at 1:06 PM ^
A very honest and level post.
M gets better players, at least from a rankings standpoint (which is all we have). The gap gets closed through coaching (identifying and developing talent, as well as game preparation). There is no question in my mind that Dantonio identifies talent and develops players, and also gives extra preparation time to the M game every year. It's deeply personal to him, and if it's not deeply personal to M, the footing becomes more even.
October 23rd, 2011 at 1:13 PM ^
We may have had better recruiting classes on paper those years, but how many of those guys we signed: 1) made it to campus; 2) stayed four years; and 3) actually panned out on the field? What would our rankings have looked like if guys like Dorsey, Turner et al. were removed from the equation?
Watching the last four games in the U-M/MSU series, it's been clear to me that our talent level has been down. We have not had a single 100-yard rusher or 100-yard receiver in any of those four games. We've recorded very few sacks/TFLs. We've generally made very few great individual plays. Remember Woodson's INT and Braylon's leaping TDs? Where have those plays been from us lately? Maybe the last really spectacular individual play by a Michigan player in the rivalry was Stonum's 60-yard TD in 2009, and unfortunately he's suspended right now.
Whether you want to blame it on Carr, Rodriguez, Martin, Brandon, the phases of the moon - we have not had Michigan-level talent on the field. (It's not only manifested itself against MSU, of course. We used to have a 1,000-yard tailback and 1,000-yard receiver every year, and we haven't had either since 2007.) Now, it's possible that our 2012 recruiting ranking is inflated, but there's no particular reason to believe that right now. If MSU's coaching staff has a good eye for talent, then the fact that MSU wanted a lot of these guys is a good sign.
October 23rd, 2011 at 2:12 PM ^
2007
Donovan Warren 5* - worked out pretty good one more year would have been nice
Ryan Mallett 5* - worked out good (for Arkansas)
Toney Clemons 4* - yeah, Colorado? How's 1-7 feel, does that feel like Lloyd Carr? (sorry I couldn't help it)
Mike Williams 4* - too bad about him, concussions
Martell Webb 4* - Rich Rodriguez - tight end - that is all
Ryan Van Bergen 4* - those who stay
There is definately merit to your point about developing players and attrition of players. I am glad to see that we have kept a lid on attrition for the most part. Only two of those "top recruits" have worked out. That is just football for the most part. Injury, development, utilizing player assets. Compare to MSU for discussion point.
2007
Kirk Cousins 3* - pretty much had his way with U-M
BJ Cunningham 3* - all time MSU legend at reciever
Greg Jones 3* - back to back 1st Team All American
Mark Dell 4* - played in 47 games, started in 27
I know I have picked some players out and not included the entire list, but it does make the point further that development is as important as recruitment. It does serve for interesting discussion because of the current state of our program; and the future that we are headed for.
October 23rd, 2011 at 12:50 PM ^
2007 record 9-4 (5-3 Big Ten) L Outback, Tenn
2007 record 7-6 (3-5 Big Ten) L, Citrus FSU
2009 record 10–3 (5–3 Big Ten) W Champs Sprots Miami
2010 record 11–2 (7–1 Big Ten) L, Rose TCU
2011 record 6-1 (2-1 B10)
aggregate:
43-16 (22-13) 1-3 Bowl
39-20 (23-12) 0-4 Bowl
I'll let you figure out which team is which (and whose been playing ND every year in the OOC instead of Fresno St)
October 23rd, 2011 at 1:10 PM ^
enough about state that I would not miss them if they left the B1g for the MAC (or other) and we did not play them again.
We don't get riled up over the big UM vs CMU game or the heated UM vs EMU game. So why does anyone get all excited over the UM vs MSU game?
We don't really compete for the same kids. The only player that I recall that went to MSU that had a M offer was Pittman, and it remains to be seen if he has the grades to make it.
I want to win every game on the schedule, no matter who it is. So if MSU was off the schedule and CMU was put on the schedule, I would cheer for M to beat them too.
In my opinion, MSU is NOT a rivalry game.
October 23rd, 2011 at 1:16 PM ^
MGoBlog readers: Which scenario would you prefer?
A. MSU doing well with a prune-faced, DOOSH-y coach who often looks the other way at criminal behavior (on and off the field).
B. MSU doing well with a coach who is respected (if not loved) by all. Pat Fitzgerald may not be the best example, but he's the one who came to mind. What if Sparty had a coach like that and a true law-and-order program?
- - -
I'd much prefer the first scenario.
October 23rd, 2011 at 1:23 PM ^
I like MSU being the villain. Now the good guy just has to win.
October 23rd, 2011 at 1:26 PM ^
I honestly dont care about MSU at all. They mean nothing to me. There becoming a threat but I still just dont care about them.
October 23rd, 2011 at 9:32 PM ^
but if they keep kicking our ass you will have to acknowledge them. Michigan has to get back to respectability and take care of business with MSU and tsio. Then we can all say "we don't care about them".
October 23rd, 2011 at 2:33 PM ^
I think you are expecting way too much from this board. Hell, look at the defiantly immature posts here getting upvoted.
MGoBoard proves that Michigan is just like any other fanbase. Get fans en masse in one spot and you will see incredible bias and very little rational thought when it comes to their own program or its rivals.
October 23rd, 2011 at 11:00 PM ^
MSU is a legitimate threat. I agree it takes more than one year to make a program. They are known as being the same ol spartans because they always crumble. Thats why they never got the big recruits. We have the advantage of a rich history and offer the best stadium and best uniforms in the country for recruits. Its also nice to tell them to be a part of the winningest football program ever.
But MSU went 11-2 last year. What if (big IF) they win the first ever big 10 championship game this year? They're defense is killer and they are young (they'll lose Worthy to the NFL, and Robinson to graduation, and Gholston to the State Pen), so they'll still be good next year. I think kids are going to start to think MSU is becoming legitimate. How will their 2013 class look? Remember, these kids were only 5 or 6 when Woodson led us to our last national championship. Their perspective might be a little different
MSU is not like CMU or WMU. We have actually beaten them the last 4 years. Its about time for our staff to take this game seriously and take the state of Michigan back, like it always has been.
October 24th, 2011 at 6:36 AM ^
I have a feeling our staff is taking the game seriously.
<br>We have a countdown clock.
<br>Just sayin'
October 24th, 2011 at 2:44 AM ^
Dantonio does develop 3 star talent into sometimes, i repeat sometimes NFL caliber draftable players, and since MSU joined the Big Ten...they have a close record vs Michigan...but Michigan will always rule the State and get what recruits they want . It really is kinda like Purdue vs ND for in state recruiting. Only a MSU victory binge will change that. Hoke takes this rivalry much more seriously then RR did.