OT- Syracuse crushes MSU (YTMSU)

Submitted by kaykaybroke on

I'm sure some of you saw this, but I didn't see it posted anywhere so here it is: 

Michigan St. was crushed by Syracuse yesterday 72-58.. and I don't know how this relates to UM's performance against Syracuse, but all I can say is that UM kept it a lot closer, and Syracuse didn't play as well as they did yesterday.. still a 14 pt victory for the orange however.

link to article for those who're interested: http://rivals.yahoo.com/ncaa/basketball/recap?gid=201012070553

Top Performers:

MSU- Durrell Summers -7-15,  18 Pts

6 Rebs, 1 Assists

Syracuse- Rick Jackson 8-15,  17 Pts

16 Rebs, 1 Assists

lbpeley

December 8th, 2010 at 11:24 AM ^

It loses a little when people type "/s" after a post so I try not to do that. Maybe that would have been appropriate here, though.

Geaux_Blue

December 8th, 2010 at 7:53 AM ^

We lost too. There used to be a time where this site only cared about Michigan. Now posts like this convey an insecurity that at least I know that I don't possess. Pointing out a team like MSU lost is like mocking the captain of the football team when he throws a pick in the state championship. He's still leading the team, you're serving water.

In reply to by somewittyname

Geaux_Blue

December 8th, 2010 at 8:20 AM ^

there's no posts about PSU barely squeaking by Mount St Mary's, Minnesota falling to Virginia (by a similar margin) a bit ago or Wisconsin's loss to Notre Dame last week. there wasn't even a post about Illinois beating UNC. so i'm supposed to believe MSU losing to Syracuse was just part of the Big Ten Interest Trajectory. 

this board is becoming more and more like the RCMB by the day and i'm guessing you can tell i don't like it.

oriental andrew

December 8th, 2010 at 8:26 AM ^

It's of interest to me because msu is an actual rival (illinois, minnesota and wisco - not so much) and they just played a common opponent.  Clearly the transitive property does not apply, but one way to gauge Michigan's ability is based on that of other teams and common opponents.  

And it's not even close to RCMB until OP starts making jr high-level insults about the players, coaches, campus, town, and school colors.  =P

Rasmus

December 8th, 2010 at 8:42 AM ^

Come on! Maybe the board is becoming what you say it is, but this is not a good example. UM and MSU have one common opponent so far this season, so the relative outcomes of those two games is of direct interest. You can argue that it doesn't mean much, and I didn't see the Syracuse game, so I don't know if it was as close as the score might indicate, but it is most definitely something to talk about.

Geaux_Blue

December 8th, 2010 at 8:43 AM ^

what is the point of comparing UM to MSU at this point? MSU lost a game which is closer than it appeared due almost entirely to an 8 point run they made early in the first half. MSU never closed that gap and ended up losing by 12 due to garbage time pot-shots. this post would make complete sense if UM was even close to rivaling MSU for a Big Ten title, etc. however, when the entire informational base of the post is "UM played them closer, MSU got smoked" and doesn't take into account neutral vs. home court, etc., it just looks like LOL MSU. i'm all for a consistent engagement of how UM stacks up in the Big Ten. however, when that engagement is limited to pointing out an MSU loss exclusively, i call a spade.

Carcajous

December 8th, 2010 at 8:46 AM ^

UM vs. Syracuse was on a neutral court as well.  And, the specific reason I watched the game last night is that I was curious to see how good Syracuse might be.... in order to better put our game with them in context.  Maybe I'm an idiot for doing that, I suppose.

Geaux_Blue

December 8th, 2010 at 8:48 AM ^

if you call MSU playing Syracuse in New York "neutral"...

and, since you watched the game, can you not say Syracuse played a ton better than they did against UM while, additionally, MSU made a LOT of glaring errors that they didn't necessarily make in previous games with lower talent?

Geaux_Blue

December 8th, 2010 at 9:01 AM ^

titled "Syracuse crushes MSU" and features the OP throwing down a "Jump to Conclusions" matt that utilizes the very transitive theory you already noted is flawed in this instance.

except you seem to keep thinking Syracuse playing in NYC is neutral court...

also, again, Syracuse played completely different basketball. completely different. there was absolutely zero comparable elements between the two versions of the guys in orange. and that's not because UM played tremendous defense.

M2NASA

December 8th, 2010 at 9:44 AM ^

I find it funny that when talking Big Ten expansion that most everyone dismisses Syracuse's presence in New York City yet sees and acknowledges it when we (SU) plays in the Garden and it's nearly full of orange.

JTGoBlue

December 8th, 2010 at 9:06 PM ^

Of how a post that should obviously lend to relevant discussion (comparing rival teams performances to a common opponant in this case) somehow doesn't meet the 'criteria' of the MGoSnobs...growing tired of the sarcasm, thread de-railing, whining about a repeat post, 'CC' warnings, etc...fuck, do I have to find something else fun and mindless to do?  Amazing how serious people are about this shit...

michfan4borw

December 8th, 2010 at 9:20 AM ^

You act as though Michigan had NOTHING to do with Syracuse barely beating Michigan.  Michigan played well on the road against Syracuse. Perhaps Beilein's familiarity with Syracuse's system had something to do with it.  Perhaps Beilein is better than Izzo with "X's and O's" while Izzo is a better motivator with tired players currently.  It's all speculation. 

I watched both games.  I watched the Michigan game to see how our players look in a system they were recruited for. 

I watched the MSU game to see how good/bad Syracuse really is relative to a loaded roster at MSU with much preseason and current hype.  Essentially, I wanted to see how much weight to put on Michigan's performance against Syracuse.  

You're insecurity with Michigan (and its fanbase) being currently hyped less than MSU is obvious.  Settle down. 

Rasmus

December 8th, 2010 at 9:18 AM ^

All you've done is shown that it's a worthwhile discussion. So what if the OP is clueless -- the point of the Board is to clue him or her in. The question crossed the minds of pretty much everyone interested in Michigan basketball, and it's worth asking. You cut the OP's point of view to shreds, rightfully so. Nonetheless, it was and is a valid topic. You basically told the OP not to post. That's what I was objecting to. The OP rightfully thought this is something worth talking about on the Board. I just don't think it matters if an OP exposes themselves to ridicule as long as the topic is worthwhile. 

Geaux_Blue

December 8th, 2010 at 9:56 AM ^

i didn't tell them FAIL or post a gif of a camel riding a motorcycle into a wall or something. i specifically noted the tone and lack of quality 'analysis' of the comparative games other than "score" was misleading and went more to hyping an MSU loss than to what, if anything, could be taken from this in terms of a head-to-head game that's significantly down the road. that's all. i'm ironically getting more ire with a polite annoyance than i would have if i posted said short, snippy elements.

maizedandconfused

December 8th, 2010 at 1:26 PM ^

First and foremost, both played on neutral courts. The Syracuse fanbase is about as diehard as it gets and travels well anywhere within a state away from NY. There seemed to be a definite Orange fanbase at both games. 

Secondly, Cuse outscored MSU in the paint 42-24..  seems like that bodes well for UM considering they executed the gameplan the coach wanted.. both Izzo and Beilein know what to do against a 2-3, the difference is UM actually followed the plan instead of trying to hit flashy jumpers. 

Third, Cuse dominated MSU  

They never trailed. This game was not close. They scored at will in the paint, and barring a solid run from MSU in the 2nd (after a timeout they stopped shooting jump shots and immediately banged down low) this game was a double digit lead

amir_al-muminin

December 8th, 2010 at 8:55 AM ^

My least favorite thing about this board is when people bitch about what others like to post about, or how they choose to do so.  Your incessant bitching is at least 150x more annoying than finding out that MSU lost to Syracuse.

If you really don't care, why the fuck do you care so much?

Carcajous

December 8th, 2010 at 8:41 AM ^

Well.... It helps us evaluate where we (Michigan) are.  We played Syracuse as well, if you recall.  We didn't play particularly well and had a chance to win that game.  We (think) we know how good MSU is (they are pretty consistent and have most everyone back from a Final Four team, and have Lucas back now) so comparing how they faired (on a neutral court) with how we faired (on a neutral court) seems pretty relevant for those of us interested in evaluating OUR team, no??

Geaux_Blue

December 8th, 2010 at 8:46 AM ^

Syracuse played like absolute garbage and allowed UM to stay in the game. the fact UM then went out and got "smoked" by UTEP should help calibrate the results. there's also a huge difference between playing Syracuse at a neutral site and playing them in New York. MSU is still trying to figure out how to play without Allen, whose departure has shifted their offense and, to a degree, their defense. add in problems with other players and they're still a team that's trying to find their rhythm. if UM played this MSU this week, these results might be telling. but they don't.

i also don't remember anyone making a post about how MSU fared against Bowling Green and doing a side-by-side with us on that.

Geaux_Blue

December 8th, 2010 at 8:51 AM ^

no. i didn't evaluate both games to compare how a head-to-head would develop. MSU played a completely different game than UM did. hostile environment against a Syracuse squad that actually played like a top 10 team. UM played a lazy, slow team that wasn't hustling for rebounds and expected to win at 80%. Syracuse actually got up for their game against MSU. i take absolutely zero from it in terms of how UM will fare against MSU because, IMO, they played two completely different teams. 

umuncfan11

December 8th, 2010 at 2:34 PM ^

So you give MSU an excuse for learning how to play without Allen?  I'd have to say playing without Manny and Deshawn, who A. are both WAY better than Chris Allen, and B. were a MUCH bigger part of the team, is a far bigger animal than your "MSU is still trying to figure out how to play without Allen."

 

Come on, get real

bryemye

December 8th, 2010 at 11:08 AM ^

Man, why why why do you click links to posts you know you won't like because they aren't exclusively about Michigan. It's even OT for god's sake.

I also wouldn't be throwing stones when it comes to insecurity. Or bitterness, which may be the more operative description there.

tk47

December 8th, 2010 at 8:24 AM ^

I was really surprised by this, I thought State would bury them.  Syracuse has won tight games against a lot of not-so-great teams and had to mount a late comeback to beat NC State at the Carrier Dome on Saturday (the same NC State team that lost to Wisconsin by like 40 week ago).

I didn't watch most of the first half but it looked like State made it close in the 2nd until a shitload of turnovers did them in.