SIAP: Chait on importance of this week's game
I didn't see this posted or in my search results. It is John Chait's take today on the importance of this MSU game.
http://www.michigan.rivals.com/content.asp?CID=1136157
Having lived outside Michigan and now being back in Michigan, I couldn't agree more. Some of us in state Michigan fans have a skewed perspective.
A few highlights:
If you're a Michigan fan living in state, you probably think this is a must-win game. Having lost two straight year to the Spartans, a third loss would signal an irrevocable shift in momentum. MSU would take its place as the state's dominant program, recruiting will follow, and Michigan will be plunged into a Dark Age.
You'd be wrong.
On the story vs. fact ...
Dantonio has positioned his team as the embodiment of the old Michigan virtues that have supposedly fallen by the wayside under Rodriguez: toughness, discipline, Midwestern values. That in actual fact Rodriguez has run a tight ship, and Dantonio a halfway house disguised as a football program, has not blunted the force of this message. Stories are more powerful than facts.
October 7th, 2010 at 1:50 PM ^
In general, he's right. But in-state recruiting is important. And 365 days (or however many over a thousand it will be) in recruits ears will hurt. We don't need to get every recruit in Michigan. But we do want to have our pick of the very best. Because I can't think of any programs that really succeed if they aren't even the primary destination for recruits in their own state. You can supplement talent out of state. But in state you get guys who grew up loving Michigan, knows what it's about, will stick around through the tough times, and set the standard for everyone else. I don't think you lose that after a year; or two. It starts becoming 3...4...more....you're going to have a problem.
October 7th, 2010 at 2:00 PM ^
Didn't State lose three years in a row to CMU? I don't think it affected them much. Purdue could beat ND 5 years in a row and ND would still recruit big.
As long as Michigan is doing well and there is no danger to losing their head coach, then I am not sure it matters to recruits if MSU says "hey, we beat UM 3 years in a row" and the two schools finish about the same and UM gets a ton more media attention. I think the only thing that is effectively used against kids in-state is "job security" for the coaches.
Plus, don't we generally seek different types of players than MSU? So, not sure it would even matter in-state. Out of state, it's not really a contest.
October 7th, 2010 at 2:11 PM ^
But if you can show it, it doesn't really matter, because it's hardly the same thing, with a MAC school and a Big Ten School. I don't really think App State is out-recruiting us, either. And the thing is, particularly if MSU wins, they're not going to finish in the same spot. Michigan is going to be 7-5 - 9-3, and MSU is probably 10-2 or 11-1. Because other than Iowa, they have no one left to play. So it won't be equal - in bowl, or rankings, or prestige.
Now if we win, we may still be a game or something behind them, but it will be as you say, close.
And the only type of player we really recruit differently are quarterbacks. And emphasis on tight ends. I don't think we're turning down any great offensive linemen, or talented running backs, or a big deep threat receiver to go with slot ninjas, or heck, anybody on defense. I'd love some of their linebackers and linebacker recruits. And a few more great d-linemen to go with the Martins of the world would be nice, too.
Recruiting wise it's gone from dominating the State while letting the odd guy with MSU ties go to MSU, to getting all the top guys (thanks Bobby Williams!), to right now splitting them fairly evenly. I'd like to get back to where we get who we want, and MSU gets everybody else. Or at the very least, keep it even, and then dominate out of state. But each win, and kids are more and more likely to not remember when we dominated them.
October 7th, 2010 at 2:47 PM ^
...even if MSU wins and finished better than UM (as you mention), then there is still no issue.
Michigan with a stable coach because his program is on the rise (assuming they don't collapse, 8 wins this year?) with a player like DRob will be as attractive or more attractive to in-state kids than a second place in the B10 MSU team.
Seriously, do you think a player who sees the exposure and attention to Michigan would go to Spartie because they say "we won three in a row!!!" I don't. And I think if you look at the traditional power programs around the country you will see that even though recruits are young, a 5-10 year hiatus of power (especially if its just just against one "tradition inferior" team) does not spell doom.....
Of course, beating MSU is big to me...and I think it would only HELP recruiting. But, I think that a win vs. Iowa (and same finish as beating MSU) would probably affect recruiting the same.
October 7th, 2010 at 3:04 PM ^
Playing in a BCS Bowl, showing an upward swing themselves (4 bowls in a row), and all the attention that entails will at least equal Michigan's, which isn't getting a lot of pub that doesn't consist of "Boy, that Denard kid is great" (and usually followed by...and man, their defense is bad). You're seeing the national media commenting on 2 5-0 teams. Not a 11-1 and 8-4, with one playing in late December, and the other in the Rose Bowl. The talk will be different then. Particularly in-state. Which are the recruits we're talking about being swayed. (And BCS bowls start to give MSU a national perspective. Something that really probably won't happen if we beat them. They don't need to start getting a couple of talented national recruits to supplement their local ones, because some kid saw them on tv...even if it's not a head to head recruit)
Being down 5-10 years doesn't mean a power program can't ever come back. But some of those program were down for 10 years. I don't want to be down 10 years. I don't want to be down 5 years. I'm saying I only want to be down 2, not 3. Because unless you're willing to cheat, that turnaround from being down for some time doesn't happen overnight. So end it now. Rather than let it snowball for another year.
October 7th, 2010 at 3:16 PM ^
October 7th, 2010 at 3:21 PM ^
And I will whole-heartedly cop to being over-worried about everything.
And one loss might be unlikely. But really, there aren't that many games left to blow. Because if you count Iowa as a loss (and really, who knows with Iowa?) and they biff one against some crap team, as you reasonably project, that's still 10-2 (to become 10-3 when some SEC teams wastes them by 3 touchdowns....but then, the SEC isn't looking so hot either). Because Illinois, Northwestern, Minnesota, Purdue, down Penn State doesn't look like a lot of roadblocks. I prefer the lose to us, Iowa, and Sparty NOooooo! game, 9-3, when we're 8-4 or 9-3 ourselves (hey, we beat you, and you didn't have to play OSU....good luck with them, us, PSU, and Nebraska next year!) than an inflated 10 win season.
But yeah, mainly I'm just sick of Sparty and don't want any excuses not to beat them. Just win the game.
October 7th, 2010 at 3:19 PM ^
To the BCS bowl point, just look at Kansas. They actually won the Orange Bowl a couple years back (whereas I'm pretty sure LaMichael James will bang State's pussy out if the Spartans somehow manage to make it to Pasadena), but had a losing record two years later and are on track for a second straight sub-.500 season this year.
MSU is a program that can only succeed beyond the shortest of terms if the programs around them are down (as KU benefitted from the fall of Nebraska and Colorado in the Big 12 North). I don't see U-M, OSU, PSU, Iowa, Wisconsin, and now Nebraska having the kind of slip that would be necessary for MSU to become an attractive national recruiting option.
That being said, I obviously hope we knock their dick in the dirt on Saturday and put an end to any potential discussion of the subject immediately.
October 7th, 2010 at 3:22 PM ^
Will not be kind to to MSU. It's doing them no favors. Other than Indiana every year. *snicker*
October 7th, 2010 at 2:09 PM ^
Our offense has zero starters from the state of Michigan. I think guys like Denard and Molk have plenty of love for U-M, as do the countless regular students who came from across the country to go attend school in Ann Arbor.
This year, after back to back losses and basically the worst two-year stretch in U-M history, MSU has one guy committed who the U-M coaching staff would get excited about (Thomas). Last year they got Gholston, a QB we didn't want, and Max Bullough (who I'm not sure we even offered) from inside the state.
MSU is always going to get the occasional one or two decent players in the state but that is all they've ever gotten and all they ever will get for eternity.
Chait is dead on that the perception gets warped for those who have to listen to the MI/Detroit media. Growing up outside of MI or even the Big 10 footprint, MSU was that school that got the opportunity to lose to Notre Dame every year because one time they played to a tie on black-and-white TV. They are Navy, but with dumber students and crappier uniforms (on field and off). They are the equivalent of Ok. State or Texas Tech, schools that may win a game from time to time but are never going to be relevant on the national stage for more than a minute or two in mid-October. If we are taking care of business (and I'm firmly convinced we will be from this point forward) MSU will be operating on an entirely lower level and will just be another team on the schedule like Purdue or Illinois.
October 7th, 2010 at 2:18 PM ^
Would look great in a Michigan uniform, there are extenuating circumstances for the guys they did get. (MSU ties, HS coaching staffs, etc). But we're not talking that the world has turned right now. We're talking about what it would be like if they've won 3 in a row, with #4 coming up in East Lansing, with 365 more days of one sided talk. It hasn't changed. But to think it never can, is just the height of Michigan arrogance. The same type that says 3-9 and 5-7 could never happen, and is unacceptable.
This is all easily remedied. Just beat the frickin' Spartans on Saturday, restore order, and shut them up. Lets not start making excuses before the game's even played.
October 7th, 2010 at 2:21 PM ^
I just think MSU has zero chance to derail the upward trajectory this program is on.
Now here's hoping Denard gets plenty of face-time with the man upstairs as he waits for his teammates to reach the endzone on Saturday.
October 7th, 2010 at 2:53 PM ^
Losing to MSU won't derail the program. I mean, we lost to OSU a lot of years (and before that, vice versa), and neither program was derailed. Both were still good. Even if it made it easier/harder to recruit in Ohio. The program will succeed if the program's going to succeed. Even 4 or 5 games in a row isn't going to change all the others around it.
But will it be EASIER if we have our pick of recruits in the State, and MSU isn't beating us once ever 3 years (as they did under Perles), but more once every 7 or 8 years (as it turned into)? Sure. We'll get better recruits, and not only get better, but get better faster. And we'll have less worry about the RichRod National Championship machine hitting a road bump by getting a loss to MSU, thus stopping the train midseason. Because as someone points out below...Iowa may be considered a bigger game, nationally...ok, not may, is...but MSU has a tendency to beat us far more often. Rivalry and all that. And those games have cost shots at National Championships, and started season downward spirals.
It's not just that we can get better faster if we're up; but by beating them, we keep them down, which makes our job infinitely easier. Because we'll still be the only Big Ten power that has to deal with an in-state rival. Might as well make that disadvantage count for as little as possible.
October 7th, 2010 at 3:08 PM ^
This is why I view Saturday's game as a huge opportunity more than the "panic, must win or else" some seem to see. Not only does it set the table for a quality season that exceeds most everybody's preseason expectations (9-10 wins looks extremely doable with a win Saturday), it cements Denard as the far and away Heisman frontrunner (non-stop positive U-M press the rest of the season), and allows the talk to switch from "How hot is RichRod's seat?" to "How big an extension should he get?" (a much bigger positive for recruiting than any win, in my view).
If Dantonio can't win with this team and U-M having had so much adversity the last two years, what can he possibly sell to recruits that would compete with a preseason top-10 ranking going into next year (almost guaranteed if we win 9-10 this year what with all the talent coming back) and the most talked about player/program in the country?
October 7th, 2010 at 3:15 PM ^
Is big. Because this game, barring a major collapse (or major turnaround after a loss), can change the question. Looking at Iowa, a better team, coming to town, with a bye week after, sets up 3 weeks of that hot seat talk. Win, and all that talk of contract extensions we've been hearing for 3 weeks doesn't sound so crazy.
And it sets up that a win next year is no "upset, and 1 of the last 4", but "8 of the last 10", and beating them and having similar records this year, and then beating them and having a lot better record next year (because we should be better in just about every way; they should struggle between losses and the most evil schedule out there to make up for this cakewalk). Order restored.
October 7th, 2010 at 2:00 PM ^
That comment about Dantonio positioning himself as the heir-apparent was hilarious. "Stories are more powerful than facts." So true.
October 7th, 2010 at 2:06 PM ^
i think the following quote says it best:
You know what the story is now: Denard Robinson. The dreadlocked quarterback is the face of Michigan football. And he's probably the biggest story in college football. Michigan has an identity again, and it's a humble, hard-working sophomore with blazing speed, a zippy arm, a boatload of records and two game-winning touchdown drives.
As we speak, there are thousands and thousands of kids out there who have become Michigan fans because of Robinson. Five years from now and ten years from now, we'll be reading in their recruiting profiles when they commit to Michigan about how Shoelace made them dream of playing in Ann Arbor.
October 7th, 2010 at 2:10 PM ^
Jon Chait is the man. I feel like he is the only writer for 1000 miles who sees actual reality.
That being said, I want the game Saturday.
October 7th, 2010 at 2:15 PM ^
I know he's on here. Which one of you is Jon?!
October 7th, 2010 at 2:30 PM ^
Tater
October 7th, 2010 at 2:20 PM ^
can't lose this game.
October 7th, 2010 at 2:20 PM ^
I just want all those who assert that losing to MSU three years in a row is no big deal to promise that if we beat MSU three years in row that you won't crow about beating Little Brother 24/7/365. You can't have it both ways.
October 7th, 2010 at 2:37 PM ^
I think you are missing the variances in degree of how "important" the game is to Michigan.
It is important. It is a "big deal." All B10 games are a big deal. It is a ranked opponent. Other ranked B10 teams will also be a "big deal."
I just think that it is mainly the local fan who thinks that MSU is a bigger game than Iowa. Both are "big deals," but Iowa is considered a little better (AMERICA!!!WOOOO). I think people outside Michigan would see a win over Iowa and a loss to MSU as the same or better than a win vs. MSU and a loss to Iowa. In-state fans do not.
The reality is that Michigan is a national recruiting power, so what happens in the national perception is probably more important than in-state (if the two perceptions were different) especially since many otehr states have top level talent that we will need to compete with OSU, Florida, Texas, USC...... For instance, more big time recruits are coming in for the Iowa game.....
October 7th, 2010 at 3:09 PM ^
We do in Michigan. And Ohio for that matter, where Dantonio is getting Tressel's sloppy seconds (as are we, for the moment). So the less competition for those players, the players we're actually going head to head with other teams on, makes the MSU game more important than an Iowa game. We have to get those players, to get good enough to start challenging those other teams again. And when we can do that, we can worry about competing with Texas and Florida. Once we're there, then fighting over a state recruit while getting 5 stars from around the Country won't matter. But we're not there yet. And to get there, we have to control the State. Because, again, I don't see any of those school you list succeeding when they can't even control the recruiting in their own State. (Which is why Florida seems to have one dominant team, one really good team, and one meh team at any given time; even with all that talent down there).
October 7th, 2010 at 2:44 PM ^
And I have never once considered beating the Spartans a big win.
October 7th, 2010 at 3:11 PM ^
Chait is right. If we did not recruit nationally it might matter critically, but we do (and have for decades). Consider this, even if we lose, the recap story will begin: "Denard Robinson was not able to __ this time..." It will be a Denard story. ESPN has had an avalanche of Denard-related articles in the last 10 days. Denard is more interesting to a national and global audience than a team with awful colors that is on the rise up the middle ranks of the Big 10. Chait is right that Michigan football is fine and still the healthier program even with a loss (assuming wins in other key games, like Iowa, PSU, etc.)
All that being said...I want to win this game more than any other on the schedule. Yes, any other (this year). Like Chait, I live in DC. I don't see many MSU people, and the ones who have chosen to travel to the U.S. city with the smartest people and lowest salaries are not so bad. But I lived in Michigan recently. And I smolder with irritation everytime I read the sort of comments Chait discusses. I want it to die Saturday. Joe lunchpail caucasian can find some other way to sees his values vindicated in the world. The 5'9" guys with dreads are running wild this weekend. Please God let it happen.
October 8th, 2010 at 9:30 AM ^
Ummm.... not to split dreadlocked hairs or anything. But students have had stood eyeball to eyeball with Denard put him at a solid 5'11". And Mel Kiper, Jr. said that he is 5'11 1/2".
But of course you could be referring to Tay Odoms. Well, if that is the case..... my bad.
October 7th, 2010 at 3:34 PM ^
Enjoyed that very much ... I'll be sending that article to every fussbudget Old Blue in my social circle. Indeed, "What ESPN says about you matters a whole lot more than what the Detroit Free Press says about you."
Also:
"Dantonio has positioned his team as the embodiment of the old Michigan virtues that have supposedly fallen by the wayside under Rodriguez: toughness, discipline, Midwestern values."
That is a big part of why the Spartan "resurgence" has been so @#$%ing annoying. I could handle their 2-win streak and their couch-burning fans a lot more easily if they were being coached by, say, Dan Enos. But, no -- it has to be Family Values Dantonio and all that nonsense, too.