Tom Izzo's media quotes with my questions inserted (attempt at humor apparently failed)
Me: Coach Izzo, do you think big-ten-regular-season scheduling is much different now with Nebraska in the conference than it was before?
Izzo: "'Everything has changed so much,' coach Tom Izzo said. ""
Me: "Changed so much"? Really coach? I see that since at least as early as the 1998-1999 season, a big ten team would often avoid playing twice against at least two teams each. What do you think about the effects of having to not play every team each twice?
Izzo: "'There's been seasons we've either won or lost strictly on schedule,' Izzo said. 'If it's really erratic -- playing the top four twice and the bottom four once -- that could be a four- to six-game swing. And who you play on the road (means) a lot. I think the champion a lot of times is now determined by the schedule.'"
Me: You say the champion is "now determined by the schedule"? Doesn't logic suggest that that must have been the case as far back as 1998 then?
Izzo: (silence)
Me: So you're saying that at least some of the big ten titles MSU won since 1998 were not based on merit?
Izzo: (silence)
Me: Do you think you'd make the same argument if your team were today alone in first place in the big ten conference?
Izzo: (frown)
Dantonio (surprise appearance): "'OK, here's what we're going to do,' Dantonio said. 'We're going to get other people up here. We're going to talk about more than [scheduling].
'How many guys got a guy that's [knowledgeable on big ten scheduling]?' Dantonio asked . . . . After a couple raised their hands, Dantonio said: 'One, two -- so the two guys can go back there in the corner and talk about that. All of us right here, we're going to talk about [excuses for losing] for everybody. Let's go.'"
sources (disclaimer: one link is to a free press article; please avoid clicking to it if possible): http://www.freep.com/article/20120201/SPORTS07/202010433/Big-Ten-schedule-imbalance-irks-Michigan-State-s-Tom-Izzo
February 1st, 2012 at 1:35 PM ^
It's national signing day and you're writing a hypothetical conversation with Izzo?
February 1st, 2012 at 1:38 PM ^
Not sure why I clicked on this thread...
February 1st, 2012 at 1:39 PM ^
I don't mean this in a negative or snarky way either, I just have no idea what is going on here
February 1st, 2012 at 1:39 PM ^
I guess it is stupid idiot post day
February 1st, 2012 at 3:39 PM ^
it was funny. Spartans have really been vocal about this rivalry recently. Agenda driven no doubt.
February 1st, 2012 at 1:43 PM ^
Thanks for making us all look bad.
February 1st, 2012 at 1:44 PM ^
STATE is little brother, not us. We don't need to hang on every word out of the mouth of Tom Izzo do we?
February 1st, 2012 at 1:44 PM ^
Some of the Branch Davidians escaped the Feds, Tanks and burning home.
February 1st, 2012 at 1:45 PM ^
What the hell is this? So you took quotes he had from a real interview, and then proposed you're own fake questions? I'm being serious, I don't get this thread
February 1st, 2012 at 1:47 PM ^
Does Izzo use chew? Where can I buy my #1 Diggs jersey? Based on no evidence at all, who is the dirtiest recruiter? Why is water wet? These are the questions that need answers.
February 1st, 2012 at 1:49 PM ^
If you read the article Izzo says there have been seasons they've WON and lost based on strictley the schedule. SO, he's admitting that there are years it's worked for them.
I think everyone in the B1G would agree that it would be ideal to have 20 conference games....it only makes sense.
February 1st, 2012 at 1:49 PM ^
If you read the article Izzo says there have been seasons they've WON and lost based on strictley the schedule. SO, he's admitting that there are years it's worked for them.
I think everyone in the B1G would agree that it would be ideal to have 20 conference games....it only makes sense.
February 1st, 2012 at 1:52 PM ^
So nice, must say twice?
February 1st, 2012 at 1:58 PM ^
sometimes I get really excited and can't stop clicking my mouse.
February 1st, 2012 at 2:10 PM ^
shares this affliction.
February 1st, 2012 at 1:51 PM ^
Just horrible
BUT...
I think it is funny that Tom Izzo doesn't know the B10 champion is decided at the Big Ten Tournament. How does he not know that?
Regular season finish based on schedule is almost meaningless.
February 1st, 2012 at 2:01 PM ^
Agreed--horrible thread.
But the rest of that's actually not true. The winner(s) of the regular season have the title "Big Ten Champion." The winner of the tournament receives the automatic bid to the NCAA tournament and receives the title "Big Ten Tournament Champion."
The regular season winner is the conferene champion, and receives a trophy with that inscription.
February 1st, 2012 at 2:14 PM ^
...was the MSU football team the conference champion? They won the regular season through their tie-breaker with Wisco. Is Wisco just the "Big Ten Title Game" Champion?
I think not. bBecause that would be dumb for ANY sport. Basketball is no different.
February 1st, 2012 at 2:27 PM ^
Of course not. Because football has divisions, or because of some other reason known only to Jim Delaney.
Look, don't blame me if it's stupid. It's how the Big Ten does things. In its lists of conference champions, it lists regular season champions, not tournament champions. It gives a trophy with the label "Big Ten Champions" to the winner of the regular season.
This is true in the Big Ten for field hockey, men's soccer, women's soccer, men's basketball, women's basketball, men's tennis, women's tennis and baseball: the regular season determines the conference champion, and the conference tournament determines the NCAA autobid.
I'm not arguing that it should work that way or that it shouldn't, but it is the way the Big Ten works.
February 1st, 2012 at 2:11 PM ^
Fuckery.