I was leaving Detroit on I-75 Northbound yesterday and I saw a billboard with the score of the MSU-Wisky game and a rose underneath. I assume that MSU or an alum paid for it, but it didn't make sense.
Is this supposed to be a way of awarding MSU a rose even though they were shut out of the Rose Bowl? Or was it part of their advertising campaign back before the bowl selection process? I'm just confused. Has anyone else seen these billboards around the state?
Sparty being Sparty. "No
I love how they keep focusing
I love how they keep focusing on their head-to-head against Wisky.
They fail to consider that all losses are not created equal. Wisky's 1 loss was a road loss to a top 10 team, while Sparty's 1 loss was an utter beat down at the hands of an unranked opponent.
Seems pretty clear to me who should be in the Rose bowl.
Every time an MGoBoard poster complains about a thread topic, God kills a baby panda.
Head-to-head is ALWAYS the first tiebreaker
If Michigan went 11-1 with a beatdown at the hands of Indiana as the only loss and Ohio State went 11-1 with the only loss a close game to Michigan, I guarantee you not one person here (or anywhere else) would be arguing that Ohio State should go to the Rose Bowl over Michigan.
This wasn't perfectly analagous because of Ohio State's involvement in the tie, but it's not really analagous to the 2008 Big XII South situation where somebody had to be ahead of a team that beat them either. There was a way to order the teams that made perfect sense with head-to-head.
(Honestly, Wisconsin jumping us doesn't even bother me as much as Ohio State doing so - partly because BREATHE IF YOU HATE OHIO STATE and partly because they don't have a single win over an end-of-season ranked team. At least Wisconsin has that.)
If we got our ass handed to
If we got our ass handed to us by Indiana, I can guarantee I wouldn't want us anywhere near the Rose Bowl regardless of whether or not we beat OSU. Especially if in that beat down, we were down by 30 at the half and lost by 31. And you forgot to mention that we would also need trick plays and blocked punts to beat crappy teams. If all of this happens, I can guarantee quite a few of us wouldn't be at all surprised about not getting to a BCS bowl game. Probably because we actually know what an 11 win season feels like and I can tell you with 100% certainty that none of us would be putting up a billboard with the OSU score on it.
It would make sense if
It would make sense if everyone had played one another. But the fact that MSU and OSU didn't play negates the head to head. If we take MSU over WISC because of head to head than you have to compare MSU with OSU. Then OSU goes over MSU because their loss was to a top 10 team on the road, and MSU still got crushed by an unranked team. But if you send OSU then WISC is yelling that they beat them and the cycle continues. What state fans fail to recognize is that this is between three teams and not two. Which complicates things. Anyone outside of the area would rank the teams just as they are currently ranked and that is more telling than anything else.
lose early
Flip the MSU/Wisc and MSU/Iowa dates and I'd like your argument more. The polls always have a "what have you done for me lately" skew, and the voters (and almost everyone else) simply don't believe that MSU and Wisc are the same teams they were 3 months ago.
It's not the same, because it wasn't head to head
Not playing OSU, while looking like a break, hurt you. But frankly, they most likely would have won, and you'd be in the same spot without a share of the Big Ten title, so be grateful.
I knew the rules all those years we beat Wisconsin, but they didn't play OSU, and we lost other games and tied for the title, but didn't go to the Rose Bowl. I may have thought the Badgers lucked out, but I didn't think we were robbed.
And if we had nearly lost to Purdue, Northwestern, ND, and PSU after getting killed by Indiana, While Wisky was killing people, I would have been "eh, lucky to get a share of the title, but they were a better team for the year".
When it happens all the time, it's not a big deal. When it happens the one time you win in 2 decades, I can see why it's more of a travesty.
"I love him, he's a great coach, he's a great mentor, he's a great friend. He's every single thing you want a college coach to be, and he does it flawlessly." -David Molk
It's funny how they think
It's funny how they think they deserved the Rose Bowl, but they're double digit underdogs in the Capital One Bowl
You ain't havin it? Good, me either. Let's get together and make the whole world believers.
just sparton fans pissing and moaning ...
About getting shutout of the BCS. Best season in over a decade and MSU will still be playing a bowl game before Michigan, it's only a half hour but still.
re Sparty Pissing and Moaning
Hmmmmm...
Why not an appeal to the BCS itself by Sparty?
MSU: We're corrupt like the BCS
.
If the haters don't hate you then you're doing something wrong. - David Cone
Wiscy is the best team in the
Wiscy is the best team in the B10 this year...
ya
I don't remember OSU or Wisky losing to a 5-loss team by 31...
Or any other team playing in any BCS game, for that matter...
That Iowa - MSU beat down was worse than any beating we took this year. You'd have to be seriously dellusional to think Sparty belongs in the BCS.
I believe MSU should have
I believe MSU should have been in the Rose bowl. If it was us, and we beat Wisconsin, wouldn't we think we deserved to go? I think so. Yes, it's fun to watch Sparty bitch about the rules and I see the other side of the coin that those rules were agreed upon by all teams before the season started. No one tried to change them. But the idea that beating a team and proving you are better then that team on the field, those benefits should be extended throughout the season.
Keep in mind this was also a
Keep in mind this was also a Spartan team that got trounced by Iowa, didn't play OSU (which Wisconsin beat more handily than Sparty beat them) and barely squeaked by Purdue and Northwestern. That is not a Rose Bowl caliber team, nor do they deserve it.
yeah and they also caught
yeah and they also caught wisky before they really got rolling. people always say "timing" is everything. msu got beat by iowa later in the season. they also almost got beat by purdue. wisky got better as the season went on and sparty got worse.
also- not having played ohio state was huge. if they would've played them they would've either obviously been the choice for the rose bowl or been eliminated from the discussion completely. they can thank their "big ten co championship" to not playing ohio state.
The whole timing is
The whole timing is everything is just that. THe beauty of the system as it is now (and no, I don't wan't to discuss the merits of the BCS vs. a playoff) is that you must win every week. It doesn't matter how you win or when you win. Just win. We apply that logic to our season. We barely beat UMASS, but we won. We beat a UCONN team that wasn't ready to play at the beginning of the season. We beat a ND team that was w/o its qb (granted, we KO'd him) and relied on unproven qbs the whole game. The point is that they took care of business, whether it was NU, Purdue, or especially Wisky. Style points matter for #1, but we are talking about who represents the B10. They beat Wisky heads up, and should go before them. Does MSU go before OSU? Thats a different story.
For the fact that they didn't play OSU, who cares. Thats luck. You play the hand your dealt.
additionally, how many teams
additionally, how many teams go undefeated? Its hard to win all your games. Virginia Tech lost to James Madison for god sakes. Losing to an Iowa team that everyone will agree is better then their record is not shameful. Iowa smoked us while being hit with a nasty case of the injury bug.
Don't want to sound like a MSU homer, but I just want to bring a balanced argument to the discussion. There is logic behind it.
Right, but look at all the
Right, but look at all the 11-1 teams and tell me which one on paper, visibly, and any other possible way you look at it who is the BEST team. The best team earned the Rose Bowl IMO. That Wisconsin team improved each week to end up 11-1. That Spartan team regressed week after week to the point it looked like the Wisconsin win was more of a good timing/fluke than it was a quality win. I'm not saying this with anything negative towards Sparty, frankly I'm impressed they didn't have their usual late season collapses. But everyone who has watched all three of these teams play voted accordingly, and I'd say the way everything panned out is pretty accurate.
I agree Wisconsin is the
I agree Wisconsin is the better team, followed by OSU. I am just presenting an argument that illustrates why MSU should feel cheated in a logical and respectable manner.
If Iowa smoked us
then they sh%# all over MSU. We were within a TD and a sure tackle from a freshman from getting the ball back. Tackle missed, FG made, game over. MSU was never in the game with Iowa.
I have mentioned this before, but
MSU is not going to the Rose Bowl for the same reason that they did not goto a BCS game in 99'. It became a beauty pageant, and MSU broke out in zits. In 99 MSU got killed by Purdue and Wisconsin, and this year they got destroyed at Iowa. Late in the season it became obvious that MSU would have to look more attractive than OSU to get a BCS invite. What did they do? They threw up all over their dress against Purdue while OSU and Wisconsin were killing teams. If Sparty wants to blame someone for not going to a BCS game, they should look in the mirror.
Also, State has much more to gain, in the form of respect, from beating Alabama than they would have if they had been invited to beat up Connecticut ina BCS game.
The thing I don't get about
The thing I don't get about that logic (or lack thereof) is that it was not just a two way tie between MSU and Wiscy. It was (of course) a three way tie and not all three teams played each other. Yes MSU beat Wiscy and Wiscy beat OSU, so if you stop right there, MSU ought to go to the Rose. But since we're applying the transitive property then shouldn't it be continued because OSU beat Iowa and Iowa beat MSU. So OSU lost to a team that MSU beat, but also beat a team to whom MSU lost. So should the tie break go to OSU or MSU?
"Is There Anybody Out There?" Pink Floyd, The Wall.
I think Indiana
should get the Rose because they beat Purdue. And Purdue beat Northwestern. And Northwestern beat Iowa. And Iowa beat Michigan State. And Michigan State beat Wisconsin. And Wisconsin beat Ohio State.
Therefore, Indiana is the best team in the Big Ten.
Follow me on Twitter @gfraley05
If we had that schedule (no OSU)
with all those home games etc. etc. and barely beat teams like Purdue, Northwestern and ND (both on trick plays) then i'd be happy we were 11-1 and bitching about not going to the Rose Bowl BCS, BUT i'd also know deep down we didn't deserve it. All the whining in the world doesn't change the fact that MSU isn't as good as Wisconsin and OSU. So what if they caught Wisconsin at home early. That stuff happens. Getting molly wopped at Iowa says it all if all the other lucky stuff doesn't. This isn't really a debate.
UM beat ND in the final
UM beat ND in the final seconds, ind in the final minute and I'll on 3ots. Wins are wins.
Not when you don't go undefeated
If you continuously struggle with teams that the competition is annihilating and then get smashed by comp that the others are beating is says a lot.
Also, until a year or two
Also, until a year or two ago, in situations like this year's, the team that had gone the longest without a Rose Bowl appearance got the bid. That's how Wisconsin went in 1998, when they were tied with Michigan and OSU (and didn't play OSU). It's also how Wisconsin went in 1993, when they tied OSU in their head-to-head meeting. While I don't think MSU is the best team in the conference, it's kind of unfair to them that that old rule (which would have sent them to Pasadena) just happened to get dropped recently.
What's amazing is that Wisconsin always seems to benefit from these arbitrary Big Ten rules.
OK, but the old rule would
OK, but the old rule would have sent a less-qualified team to represent the Big Ten in a high-profile bowl game. Since many will judge the conference by its bowl record, we shouldn't be sending a team that most people consider to be a worse representative than the other two options.
The old rule may be all nice and egalitarian, but it wasn't necessarily the best for the competitiveness of the conference in the bowl games.
"People who love sausage and respect the law should never watch either being made."
UConn got shut out by 26
UConn got shut out by 26 against Louisville, a 6-loss team, and lost to us by 20 as a 5-loss team. But then again they're going to get smoked in their bowl game. And they're not there because of a great season they had.
what does that have to do
what does that have to do with MSU and Wisconsin? the Big East gets an automatic qualifier for their conferences champion, as bad as they may be.
I think
I think he's replying to this quote
I don't remember OSU or Wisky losing to a 5-loss team by 31...
Or any other team playing in any BCS game, for that matter...
I thought the same thing when I read that. UConn had a far worse season than Sparty.
+1 for the handle. I loved
+1 for the handle. I loved seeing him make a sick pass breakup last week I think.
Story on MLive
It's a nice story
Taken at face value, the story is quite touching, but as a PSA, not so much.
If they hadn't been absolutely destroye by Iowa, they would have even the slightest argument.
Best record in 50 years, but if they played OSU things might be different or still the same...
Summary:
The billboard was put up as a tribute to a recently deceased Sparty.
So I guess the moral of the story is that while Sparty claims to a Rose Bowl birth may be hilarious, you might want to go easy on the creators of this particular billboard.
Let's be honest
Let's be honest here......
If this billboard were really a tribute to Grandpa, they would have put his name and picture next to a Spartan logo.
From the story:
The e-mail noted CBS Outdoor was offering billboard opportunities to disgruntled Spartans fans who wanted to share their feelings that the team should be in the Rose Bowl after a championship season.
This is a simple case of a Spartan family being taken for a ride by an advertising company.
Ah... missed that
Okay, my bad. Fisking approved.
If we start fisking for being compassionate
Well...that would be the internet.
"I love him, he's a great coach, he's a great mentor, he's a great friend. He's every single thing you want a college coach to be, and he does it flawlessly." -David Molk
Its all about reputation and not being a flash in the pan
Wiscy and the Bucks get the nod. Sorry spartie.
Go Blue !!!
Dave Brandon: Detailed and thorough investigation proves that Freep report was intentionally misleading.
I think it's more that
I think it's more that Wisconsin's loss came earlier in the season and finished the season strong, whereas MSU got embarassed by Iowa and struggled with weaker opponents down the final stretch. Looking at the second half of the season only for both Wisconsin and MSU, do you really think MSU has a remote chance of winning that matchup now?
Its all about a convoluted
Its all about a convoluted system. BCS rankings shouldn't decide who represents your conference in the bowl game. Like it or not Sparty whipped your ass this year, they whipped Wisconsin as well. Whether or not they deserved to be there or not is irrelevant. They won the Big10. So if you guys are going to lay out the they beat the team that beat the team arguments, Wisky stomped OSU, Sparty stomped Wisky, therefore Sparty by default beats OSU.
There is no valid argument to leave MSU out of the BCS this year. They are out simply because they lost at a bad time. Had they lost at the start of the year instead of the end of the year, they would be in the BCS.
there are plenty of valid
there are plenty of valid arguments...
1. you didn't take care of business, and so you left it up the system to decide..
1a. You are MSU and aren't as respected as either Wisky or OSU, so you needed to win to remove all doubt
2. You lost later in the season
3. THe most important one-the rules on how a situation like this was to be resolved were established before the season started, If you didn't like them, you should have changed them. By not trying to change it, you accepted its conditions.
4. SOS
Take your pick
How have you and Phork not been banned yet?
I wish the mods were less concerned with titties on the site and more concerned with all the boobs.
(Not to include the other Spartan fans in this thread who I may disagree with but carry themselves with class)
"I love him, he's a great coach, he's a great mentor, he's a great friend. He's every single thing you want a college coach to be, and he does it flawlessly." -David Molk
I made one really bone headed
I made one really bone headed post, that I fully regret, and was negged into oblivion (almost).
SOS means Strength Of
SOS means Strength Of Schedule Ass.
Unless you have a severe little brother syndrome
3. THe most important one-the
3. THe most important one-the rules on how a situation like this was to be resolved were established before the season started, If you didn't like them, you should have changed them. By not trying to change it, you accepted its conditions.
Err Dantanio was the only Big10 coach to vote against the BCS being the deciding factor. That was 2 years ago I believe.
Did you actually read any of
Did you actually read any of the comments on this thread? I guess getting curb-stomped by a 7-5 Iowa team has nothing to do with not getting into the BCS, does it? Actually, why don't you point to another team that lost by 31 points this year to anyone and still made it into a BCS game. I'll wait.....
Also, I think you missed the point of the post if you think whether or not they deserve to be in the Rose Bowl is irrelevant.
There is no valid argument to
There is no valid argument to leave MSU out of the BCS this year.
Except for, you know, the rules that dictate who gets into the BCS.
by default?
What the fuck does that even mean in college football?
By your logic, we actually beat OSU this season. YAY us!
http://mgoblog.com/mgoboard/seasonthrough-transitive-property
The difference is that your
The difference is that your transitive equations go 5 and 6 deep. Involving the following teams, OSU, Iowa, MSU, Wisky, Michigan. You didn't beat any of them straight up, let alone through a second layer.
Sparty being Sparty. "No respect".