MSU voted 3rd in Big Ten by Big Ten Media Day voters
I just read in the newspaper (macomb daily) that MSU was predicted to finish 3rd in the big ten... wtf?
I understand they have an easy schedule, but doesn't they fact that they're, like, not good have anything to do with it?
Last year I had all this "Javon Ringer is leading/will lead the spartans to the top of the big ten" stuff shoved down my throat. Now that he's gone, along with many other players including the qb, it turns into "Well the spartans did lose ringer but it won't affect them THAT much, I don't think they will drop at all in the big ten standings." Seriously?
IIRC, Wisconsin almost/should have beat MSU in EL. They lose PJ Hill, MSU loses Javon Ringer. Considering they play in Madison this year, I don't think it would be unreasonable to pick Wisc over them. How is Iowa not predicted to finish better than them? Illinois is also another candidate to finish above them. In my personal opinion I think that Michigann will be better, but I guess having them lower can be justified by 2008 and our schedule.
At the risk of being repetitive, I just can't get over how much everyone wanted to hype up ringer last year, and now that he's gone it won't even affect them...
DANTONIO DOMINATES IN-STATE COACHING.
SUGARCOAT - NOT!!!
IIRC Michigan was voted third last season (behind OSU and Wisconsin) so there is no reason to give these rankings any more credence than any other preseason rankings.
It's clear that OSU and PSU are the preseason teams to beat in the B10 and Iowa, Wisco, Illinois, M, and MSU are consistantley reordered in the middle.
As soon as Sparty loses a close one to ND, Wisco, or M (all in the first 5 weeks of their season) people will be jumping off the bandwagon faster than Elno Lewis can say "Potato Salad"
I know we were ranked 3rd pre-season last year, which we shouldn't have. However the only difference, IMO, is that Michigan had built a reputation for reloading over the past couple decades. MSU I don't believe has done that.
But like the rest of you said it's better to just wait until the season and see how they play. Just having a hard time waiting.
Is it just me or is this the longest offseason ever?
Having an awful season just makes the next one take so much longer to arrive.
Definitely not just you. I've literally been having dreams about opening day since April. I'm fucking losing it here.
crap me too...except my dreams arent happy. Were always winning in the beginning, but end up losing at the end. It's always against sucky teams too. Then I get depressed for the rest of the day. I should stop reading this blog...basically not going to happen.
Considering we didn't make a bowl this past year, this literally is the longest offseason in most of our lifetimes.
Considering that I'm in Iraq so I've had plenty of time to alternate between my favorite Michigan blogs, yes it has indeed been the longest ever.
and keep them competitive. I think the general feeling beyond PSU and OSU is that it's a free for all for those next 4-5 spots. Seemed like even Dantonio isn't quite sure of being slotted #3.
As for "they [sic] fact that they're, like, not good have anything to do with it," why not let them play to indeed see if they're not good?
"MSU's D should be pretty solid and keep them competitive."
I could SWEAR I've heard this before somewhere.
but I don't expect the implosion this year that has been typical of MSU and high expectations in years past. (This is not your Grandfather's Oldsmo-Spartans ... I think as much as he makes most M fans' blood boil, Dantonio is likely to keep them solid for quite a while.) While I don't think the D will be world beaters, they have some solid talent and experience, and Greg Jones is the real deal. I would not be surprised to see him enter the draft next spring.
MSU has some talented players coming back and some talented freshman. Picking between Iowa, Wisconsin and MSU is splitting hairs. Time will tell how they fare.
The media won't put a team that went 3-9 last year and now with a true freshman QB as high as 3rd.
I agree that MSU finishing the season at #3 in the Big Ten sounds a little far fetched right now. The problem is that there are so many unknowns at this point that no one has any idea how things will play out.
It's a new season. Losing Ringer may or may not set MSU back significantly. Michigan may or may not be better than MSU this year. Just because people voted MSU third doesn't mean they're complete idiots... it means they're making different assumptions than most of us are.
Iowa also lost its running back-that-made-up-their-entire-offense in Shonn Greene. It's wide open for third. I'd say Illinois probably should have been voted third, but everyone but Indiana and Purdue have somewhat of a shot.
I don't know where the Iowa defender guy is, but he would counter that argument by saying their defense should be just as good and that the O-Line that paved the way for Greene last year is back and ready to do it again this year...
I personally agree, though, that it isn't likely that they'll repeat last year's performance.
Iowa defender guy here. I am fully aware that Iowa will probably shit the bed and win five games and I will get flack all offseason for defending Iowa, but, hey, I'm sticking to my guns.
Anyway, yes, Iowa is returning 8 starters on defense from a very good defense, they will have a beefy offensive line that returns 3 of last year's starters. Ricki Stanzi and Jewel Hampton should do just fine in the backfield. Plus, Ferentz is (or, at least has the reputation to be) a great coach. Iowa wins at least nine games, I feel
Dantonio is created the new monster program in the country, and there's no way that Rodriguez can compete. When we go up to EL they'll be 4-0 and ranked in the top 15 and we'll probably be 1-3 and struggling to put our cleats on correctly. The Spartans should feel supremely confident, and Dantonio can probably play his second and third stringers for much of the game, since they're so deep with talent due to his fantastic recruiting. There's no doubt that by then 30 more guys will have left our team and half of the remaining will be out on bail or on academic probation. If we somehow manage to beat them up there it will be one of the new century's biggest upsets.
just e-pinion.
You forgot that most of our starters will be arrested and suspended indefinitely prior to the season's start for "Michigan Arrogance."
I love how Sparty fans say they will be just fine without Ringer. On RCMB all last year they loved him. Now they are saying that they had the 9th best rushing team in the B10 and will somehow be better without him.
The important thing to recognize is just how little we all care about Sparty.
Oh wait....
1) I suspect that MSU barely beat out Iowa/etc. in the voting. The fact they don't release the voting details (and only go 3 teams deep) makes the result see more dramatic.
2) The fact we don't have to play OSU was probably the tie-breaker for a lot of voters.
Hey man, enjoy the Blog over at SBN. Good to see you guys represented so well over there.
Possibly more of a question for your blog, but since you're here:
I am convinced your QB situation will be 'Addition by Subraction' much the way I thought Penn State's was last year going from Morelli to whoever won the job, be it Devlin or Clark.
So, do you agree? Gut feeling, which QB should get the call.....and can the immediate ceiling be as high as the improved QB play saw last year at PSU?
Thanks. I will hang up and listen
I thought Nichol was going to be anointed the replacement to Hoyer, from everything I have read, I now believe Cousins has out-played him in practice and will probably start at QB. I do agree with the addition by subtraction theory. While Hoyer had good moments, he was never clutch in big games (OSU, BC, Georgia, and PSU).
I actually thought Hoyer got a bit of a bad rap last season. Hard to be successful when you're constantly being asked to throw on third and long and rarely being given chances on first and ten.
I think the addition-by-subtraction theory holds in the long run--by midseason, optimistically. It's just a matter of how long it takes to identify the starter and get that guy comfortable as the leader of the offense. With three seasons of eligibility remaining for both Cousins and Nichol, I think Dantonio will take his time in picking the starter, potentially sacrificing a game or two this season for stability over the next two seasons (when contention for a Big Ten title is more likely).
Oh, and I like Nichol. If it's close, you have to go with the guy with more innate talent. With Ringer gone, we need a playmaker on offense.
Thanks for the kind words about our work. Looking forward to the first football season with tne new blogging team in place.
A reasonable Sparty who does not come on here to rehash tired old talking points and deluded Dantonio propaganda. I like it.
for a rational analysis.
Sometimes we get a little... uh... confused?
It's the offseason, and maybe some strange behavior can be forgiven?
MSU didn't win last year because of Ringer (and his 5 YPC). They won because their defense was alright, they got a few lucky breaks, and kept their heads on. I think that the Iowa/Wisconsin analogies are apt. They're just the latest steady Big Ten power running team that will finish every year with 6-9 wins.
I think that MSU is being a little overhyped this year. They crack down on Michigan's incoming qbs saying that they will be bad again because of inexperience, but they have the same issue. Yes, Wisconsin should've beaten MSU in EL last year. Wisconsin decided to call a timeout as time was running out, for what reason idk, as MSU was rushing on the field to try to attempt a field goal to win. The TO gave MSU time to do it and make the field goal. Personally, I think that Iowa will be better than MSU based on things I have heard and I might even put wisky right there with them. Our season could go a couple different ways, though.
If you're going with that logic, Wisconsin should have also beat UM in AA.
Both MSU and UM had comeback wins thanks to Wisconsin's poor play. It's hardly reasonable to classify one win as luck and the other as a sign of great things to come.
As far as QBs, MSU has one with actual game experience and another with a full year in the program. That's different than one guy who played in the spring game.
I pose the same ???? to you as I just did above to the MSU blogger.
Is the QB spot addition by subraction and to what extent.
While I feel you are overrating the "experience" nichol and cousin got last year, I firmly believe we will see better QB play up in E.L. this season.
My concern would be Dantonio knowing how to use it. So much was centered on Ringer last year. It will be compelling to see how much he altars the playbook and how long it will take for those changes to work out on the field.
State's QBs don't even have as much experience as John Navarre got before he became full time starter. Sure as hell didn't seem to help him much. Dumbass mistakes from the QB are still going to cost them at least one game this year in all likelihood, same as will almost certainly happen to Michigan.
I was not a Hoyer-hater. His performance in the BC game was his one truly awful performance, but clutch games against Purdue and PSU (in 2007) are often overlooked.
That said, there is significant room for improvement. Both incoming QBs appear to be a bit more mobile in the pocket. One major knock on Hoyer was the lack of touch on his passes - limited exposure suggests that both will be an improvement in this area.
My opinion is similar to Yinka's: there will be inexperienced mistakes. However, the higher ceiling for the QBs and returning experience at WR should mean a significantly healthier passing game.
As far as adjusting the playcalling, Dantonio's been the head coach at MSU for two years. The '07 scoring offense was #1 in the B10 until the bowl games and featured a balanced offense with a feature WR, TE, and 2 RBs. This year's team, personnel-wise, will be much more similar to 2007 than 2008. We aren't going to return to that level of production, but the balance will be there.
Much like our own offense, I like State to have a good offense in 2010, or does your line get decimated after this year? I don't know the depth chart and their class years.
2010 in general looks like a good chance to get a bunch of "The Big Ten is Back!" articles. Stanzi will be a senior. Pryor a three-year starter. Michigan and MSU will both have QBs with a year experience and plenty of other returning players. If Penn State has someone who can step in for Clark, the conference might finally have some quality depth again to reverse the bowl issues of recent years.
KEVIN NEWSOME!!!
If you go back to 2007, MSU's offense was the one of the best in the Big Ten, and it featured a wide variety of weapons - Devin Thomas, Kellen Freeman-Davis, Jehuu Caulcrick, Javon Ringer... Last year featured Ringer so prominently because there was no "banger" like Caulcrick and the receivers were unfortunately young and unreliable.
The playbook won't "change" - Dantonio and Don Treadwell are on record many, many times calling their offense "multiple", meaning it will take advantage of what's available to move the ball. Last year just happened to have one guy that was better at that than anyone else.
G
I cant disagree with the poll here.
Nobody looks ready to break into the top two held by OSU and PSU.
I think you can make a case for any one of 4-5 teams in the 3 spot. Sounds like enough of them made the case for MSU, so, there it is.
It will all get played out on the field. And with the difference between 3rd and 8th place seemingly thin, there will be a lot of dramatic football as the big 10 determines who its sending to the Cap One and OUtback Bowls.
My sleeper is Northwestern. 3rd place sleeeper? Sure, why not. No OSU or Mich on the slate. They could easily go 5-3 and finish in third. No Sugarcoat.
The conference is two good teams and a big pile of mediocrity and dreck. Who cares who wins the Dreck Division of the conference? All I care about is Michigan's record this year and our games, we're not contenders for the title and neither is anyone else other than PSU or OSU (barring both PSU and OSU somehow screwing up and losing 2 or 3 conference games). No one else is going through the conference slate with only one loss.
I would have taken Iowa third because unlike MSU, they are returning their starting QB, and one who was playing pretty well in the latter parts of the season. That's a pretty significant difference, even if State doesn't play OSU this year. But in the end it doesn't matter given the chasm between the top 2 and the rest of the league. The difference is what warm weather bowl you get to go to, and frankly, Tampa and San Antonio are way more fun than Orlando presuming you aren't married with kids.
This year, more than most in recent memory, the entire conference seems up for grabs. I don't think anyone will go undefeated in conference play, and the winner (or co-champs, co-co-co-champs, ugh) may very well have two conference losses. I don't see your chasm, or I guess don't see one that's very wide or deep.
I think OSU will drop at least one of @PSU or @Michigan, possibly both. I'd love to see a Happy Valley beat down (but I'm having visions of T. Pryor going nuts under the lights in a quasi-homecoming/redemption game.) Also, OSU will be coming off two hard games entering the Mich game, and dammit, we're due. I expect OSU to beat Iowa and Illinois at home but these are not automatic.
Although OSU looks to have the better Home/Away schedule in comparison to Penn State's, I like how PSU's tougher games are spaced out. OSU has to go through PSU, Iowa, Mich in consecutive weeks. PSU's schedule doesn't look to have brutal back to back games all year (Iowa - Illinois perhaps being the toughest two-week stretch ... ordinarily I would say Mich/NW/OSU would be pretty daunting but I suspect not in '09). Prediction: PSU will drop at least one of @Mich, @MSU or @Illinois with a couple tough home games with Iowa and OSU. Two conference losses not unreasonable.
Wholeheartedly agree with some other comments here that this year will be fun because it will be so unpredictable. Here's to chaos as Michigan rebuilds.
that Brian pointed out a few days ago. Remember, Michigan State got outgained by their opponents, despite going five games over. You have to wonder if this means they just caught a lot of breaks or were the proverbial "smoke and mirrors" team last year. We shall see soon!
caught a few breaks. Past MSU teams would not have won the Iowa or Wisconsin games. I think Dantonio and staff has made the team mentally stronger, as to why the media is picking them third again. Previous MSU teams would have collapsed after the drubbing OSU put on them.
I think the biggest thing Dantonio has done is turn MSU into a team that will no longer beat themselves. And yes I chuckled writing that sentence, but I think it's true. The reliably self-imploding Spartans of old are no more. However, I don't think they're a true contender for the Big Ten title. The OSU and Penn State games last year were major reality checks in that regard.
What I see as the ceiling for Dantonio's State is similar to Wisconsin under Alvarez. A team with a power running game, intent on protecting the ball and eating up clock, and a serviceable passing attack that throws around 25 times a game. And a good, probably not great, defense that keeps the games tight. I still see the secondary as a big weakness, since State never seems to have great athletes in the defensive backfield.
But get used to seeing State in those decent bowl games, winning 8-9 games every year and beating Michigan more often than they did this past decade.
I've seen people refer to last year's MSU team as "their best in who knows how long" (or something similar) but the reality is they weren't very good at any one thing at all.
Offense? Huh. Ringer was a great back, but their rushing offense was at the bottom of the league overall, and Hoyer's completion percentage hovered right around 50%. Receivers had talent, but were also inexperienced and dropped balls like they were playing hot potato.
Defense? Totally mediocre. In part due to injuries and lack of experience, but still mediocre. Don't get me wrong, they had (and have) some excellent talent, but the numbers are what they are: 7th in pass defense, 8th in run defense. Not very many sacks, OK in TO differential (+2 or so).
What helped them shed the "SOS" (Same Old Spartans) label was the fact that they minimized penalties and played good, smart football at crunch time. They were one of the least penalized teams in the league last year, and in both the Iowa and Wisconsin games (games they would certainly have lost under John L. Smith) they hung in there, made big plays when they needed to, and did just enough to win.
UM fans will undoubtedly say it was pure luck while MSU fans will likely say it was all coaching. The truth is somewhere in between. Hemingway famously said, "You make your own luck," which seems to apply here.
G
August 14th, 2009 at 2:14 PM ^
Even as a Spartan fan, I'm not sure I can back that. I was at the Green & White game, and the running game on both sides was a complete disaster. Unless you like 1.5 yards and a cloud of dust, that is. Who knows, maybe the freshmen RBs (Capers and some dude I can't remember) can move the ball better. The O-lines were strangely better in pass-blocking than run-blocking. The passing offenses were pretty awesome.
But dudes, for real, don't kid yourself about Michigan. A true freshman QB and a defense that hasn't gotten any better personnel-wise? Could I suggest the Wildcat for oh, 70 plays per game?