CFP rooting interests
A question for the Mgocommunity in regards to the College Football Playoffs ,
Who do we want to win? Specifically in the MSU vs ALA matchup? I would think we want the Big Ten to beat an SEC team any day of the week. But to have MSU and OSU do it back to back years??? I'm thinking Roll Tide! Please persuade me to think different if it means better for 'The Team'
Go Blue
December 7th, 2015 at 2:57 PM ^
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
December 7th, 2015 at 3:06 PM ^
It wouldn't serve at least as a little validation that UM lost to a pretty good MSU team? Raising Big Ten stature? Sorry, live in SEC country but grew up midwest = I root for anything anti SEC.
December 7th, 2015 at 3:40 PM ^
Having our in-state rival being in the playoff is not good for us. Having them advance to the title game is even worse. It'd validate them a lot more than it'd validate us.
Besides, MSU played almost everyone close this year.
December 7th, 2015 at 4:13 PM ^
I agree with you, but it appears that UM's bball team didn't benefit much from being in the national championship game.
December 7th, 2015 at 3:12 PM ^
Exactly this. The whole "cheer for the B1G" is outdated, pre CFB playoff thinking, IMO. It's much more important for Michigan now that our rivals, particularly MSU, don't get any more national attention than they already have. The recruiting advantage is much more important than the now remote possibility that the B1G gets shut out of the top 4 with a undefeated or even 1 loss team.
December 7th, 2015 at 3:40 PM ^
Actually happened this year, with 1-loss OSU getting turned away despite being reigning champs and looking like a top 4 team. Yes, the big 10 didn't get "shut out" entirely, but we probably didn't send our best team either.
If Stanford gets another FG against Oregon, they probably make it over MSU.So opinions about conferences still matter, even after going from a 2-team playoff to a 4-team playoff.
As for recruiting: Michigan STILL doesn't loose many head-to-head battles with MSU. A few more than in the past, but the difference is incremental.
It would say a lot about the Big Ten if it produces champions in back to back years and those champions struggle more in conference play than they do in the playoff.
To me, this "it does us zero good" argument is extremely short-sighted. I think you can argue it both ways, but to assert that it's indisputablly bad for Michigan if MSU wins the title is BS. There's a very plausible scenario where Michigan's only loss of the season is a narrow one @OSU. How are you going to feel about conference perception if some 11-1 Big 12 team that plays zero defense gets in ahead of Michigan 11-1 Michigan in that scenario?
December 7th, 2015 at 3:49 PM ^
Malik McDowell begs to differ with your analysis!!!
Norman was all msu the whole way, but that's because our coaching situation pre-2015 has sucked for years and if we weren't in on Calhoun I want to know why and find out who was responsible for recuiting his area so we can FIRE THEM AGAIN!!!!!
December 7th, 2015 at 4:17 PM ^
Some top in-state recruits always pick MSU (e.g., TJ Duckett). I'm not even sure Michigan is losing a higher rate of head-to-head battles than they did in decades past.
December 7th, 2015 at 4:46 PM ^
You're missing the point. We don't need to compete with them head to head for recruits (which we absolutely do) for this to be a negative for Michigan. Making the playoffs is a huge boon for them in recruiting, period, irrespective of who Michigan actually loses out on directly as a result. Making it to the finals, and (ugh, I just threw up in my mouth) if they win it all, would help them all that much more. It's undeniable that they're in on a much higher class of athletes now that they've established themselves as a serious program and that shows up on the field. Being in our division, they stand in the way of our aspirations year in and year out. Dantonio is enough of a thorn in the side without giving him top athletes to work with.
December 7th, 2015 at 5:38 PM ^
Well, if your concern is them just being better than they were (rather than negatively impacting Michigan)...I don't buy that as a problem.
I want Michigan to beat good MSU and OSU teams, not crappy ones.
December 7th, 2015 at 7:09 PM ^
December 7th, 2015 at 9:28 PM ^
That's a comment on what I want to see out of Michigan. It seems like you'd be perfectly happy to see Michigan join the MAC and go undefeated. That's not my idea of what Michigan can, should, or wants to be.
I want to see Michigan play 9 conference games and then use the other 3 non-conference games to play Power 5 teams. If that means we put ourselves out of the national title conversation a few times, so be it.
December 7th, 2015 at 8:38 PM ^
"Making the playoffs is a huge boon for them in recruiting, period, irrespective of..." whether MSU or OSU or whomever from the B1G wins or loses any playoff games. MAKING the playoffs is what is big.
I can just hear a good coach can spin that to a recruit- "we didn't quite it done last year, but with YOU here, it will put us over the top".
Frankly, I don't think it matters that much to a kid whether the school he is interested in wins or loses a playoff game before he gets there. He wants to believe that HE will have a shot, and HE will make a difference.
Regular season performance, conference championships, and getting a chance to get INTO the playoff matters more to them. Like it or not, MSU is already there. Obviously we all wish it was Michigan this year, or failing that Iowa, but it wasn't.
How many recruits did Michigan lose from their losses to MSU and OSU? Those games probably matter more, and supposedly have little effect on a kid's decision. A playoff loss, even less.
December 7th, 2015 at 4:40 PM ^
How are you going to feel about conference perception if some 11-1 Big 12 team that plays zero defense gets in ahead of Michigan 11-1 Michigan in that scenario?
It would suck, but it's hard to make an argument for 2 teams from a conference and locking out another deserving conference entirely, so I could definitely accept that scenario. You say MSU isn't the B1G's best team, and to the eye test, that's probably true. But, on the other hand they won the division by beating Ohio head-to-head, and won the Championship game. They are the "better team" by all reasonable objective measures. I'm perfectly ok with Ohio being left out, logically, even if I didn't flat out hate them.
I never said it had no effect, I said it was remote, and at the end of the day, you can play out all the what ifs, but the reality is that the odds are low that Michigan finds itself in a position where our rivals carrying the water for the B1G is the make or break for making the playoffs. The effects on recruiting and clout for Michigan on the other hand are immediate and much more impactful.
December 7th, 2015 at 5:54 PM ^
MSU earned the conference title by beating OSU on the road, but that doesn't mean they are the best team and it doesn't mean OSU doesn't deserve a shot at the title. Sometimes the two best teams are in the same conference. It happens. We can argue all we want about this year's resumes but it's beside the point. This is a plausible scenario and there are repeats of 2006 that could happen where we want Michigan and OSU to both be in the playoffs (or Michigan and MSU for that matter).
FEI and S&P are reasonable measures. So is Las Vegas. All of these would put OSU over MSU.
Conference perceptions DO matter, and OSU's run last year was huge for the Big 10. The narrative about the Big Ten has changed alot since last January and OSU deserves a ton of credit for that, as does MSU.
If the Big Ten establishes itself as the best conference in football we will start getting more of the SEC recruits who see IT as the dominant conference in CFB.
So MSU winning would help us be in a stronger looking conference. The argument that we will lose recruits if MSU is successful is dubious. The argument that we gain from being in perhaps THE elite football conference is stronger.
I think if you can get past sour grapes and/or the shit talking from dude in your office or your cousin or whatever, it's not hard to make the case that UM is better off with MSU winning. Hard as that is to stomach for some, it's probably true.
December 7th, 2015 at 7:18 PM ^
December 7th, 2015 at 9:41 PM ^
It was always about who you lost to more than who you beat. Nothing has changed on that front as a result of conference/bowl tie-ins gave way to a 2-team BCS playoff gave way to a 4-team BCS playoff. There was never much benefit to playing a hard schedule, and there still isn't (until you actually get IN to the playoff...)
The playoffs added one (very) meaningful game. The world has not been turned upside down as a result of that.
You're the type of guy who wants their team to play as easy of a schedule as possible, I get it. It's a pragmatic outlook if your only goal is to make the playoff.
Some of us think there's more to be gained from playing a difficult schedule with your rivals at full strength. Others look back on the 2011 victory over OSU, for example, with mixed feelings. It was good to get a win there, but it's not remotely the same thing as beating a top 5 OSU team at full strength under Urban Meyer.
The OP says MSU's success does "Nothing" for UM. You agreed whole-heartedly. I layed out why there's definitly SOMETHING that Michigan gains from it. We can argue pros and cons all day but the "Nothing" argument is as indefensible as an "Everything" argument.
Public perception matters. If you didn't figure that out after '97 Nebraska, the Rich Rodriguez era, and the Summer of Harbaugh, you might never get it. MSU winning is good for the Big Ten and what's good for the Big Ten is usually going to be good for Michigan.
I don't want MSU to have any excuses when we beat them next year. Bring em on, at full strength, with a loaded recruiting class, with Dantoinio's ego at it's pinnacle. We can (and will) beat them. ...NOW I'm chest-thumping.
December 7th, 2015 at 11:20 PM ^
December 8th, 2015 at 12:27 AM ^
It's ironic that your avatar says one thing and your words say that you are unwilling to accept the very obvious fact that conference perceptions matter.
The Big 12 dealt with the consequences last year. The Pac 12 this year. Next year it could easily be the Big Ten. Had MSU lost to Oregon (or Stanford had beaten them), it could have been this year. Literally the fortunes change on a s single play. But you're sure it doesn't matter because it hasn't hit the Big Ten yet...
There were 2 teams a bunch of conferences and now there are 4 teams and a bunch of conferences. Notre Dame is still around. Mid-conference teams are still posing a threat to join in whenever they go undefeated (which absolutely will happen one of these years.) Obviously the choices are a little less hard with 2 than 4, but that doesn't make conference strength irrelevant. Far from it.
My argument is not a strawman - it's an extension of your logic that an easier road is the better road. You want the schedule to be as easy as possible because all that matters is the playoff. My argument isn't "make the hardest schedule possible" - it's "lets beat our rivals at their full strength." I want OSU to be undefeated heading into The Game. Every year I want their season ruined BY MICHIGAN, not MSU, not Maryland, not anyone else.
I do not agree with the idea that beating a weaker MSU (or OSU) will be better for Michigan. We could/should have beat them this year and I'm very confident in the direction of the program. I want us to get stronger, not them to get weaker. It's a matter of "if we do what we are supposed to do they won't beat us.
I don't think that falls under some obscure attitude or antiquated thinking.
If you don't want to buy into it that is fine - but there are other pragmatic reasons for having tough competions:
1. better ability to recruit elite players (if you're in the best conference)
2. better prepared to win in the playoff (if you're already battle-tested by the best)
December 8th, 2015 at 8:37 AM ^
December 8th, 2015 at 11:57 AM ^
It's EASIER for Michigan to make the playoff if MSU is not as good as they could be. Nobody is disputing that. Nobody is arguing that it makes Michigan more likely to lose if MSU is better either.
The point your missing is that making the playoff isn't the only consideration. I'd rather beat a good MSU team and make the Rose Bowl than beat a weak MSU team and make the playoff. If Michigan does what it's supposed to do we beat MSU. I'm not worried about MSU getting better, I'm worried about Michigan getting better.
I don't want Michigan sliding through a weak Big Ten and then getting housed by an SEC team in the playoff. I want Michigan getting through a strong Big Ten. I would rather win 2 Big Ten titles in a decade in a strong conference than 4 or 5 in a weak conference.
Easier does not equal better.
I think you're also overlooking the fact that we had MSU beat, within 11 seconds, in just year one for Harbaugh...this despite "looking up" at them. They won. They were lucky. Flukes happen. We don't need them to get worse (or just not get better) to beat them.
Put it another way - what's more likely over the next 5 to 10 years? That we are beating MSU consistently but still losing half the time to OSU? or that we are losing to both? Yeah, in the second scenario SOS doesn't matter because we are losing. But in the first, IMO more likely, scenario SOS and conference perceptions start to matter a lot. If we have a repeat of 2006 you can be damn sure we'll want Michigan getting into the final 4.
December 7th, 2015 at 5:59 PM ^
Ohio State did not look like the best team in the Big Ten for most of the year. Really not until the last week.
December 7th, 2015 at 6:08 PM ^
Michigan did. Last week kinda changed that.
December 8th, 2015 at 8:51 AM ^
Our recruiting is going well, but MSU has beaten us for more recruits than we've beaten them for this cycle. So it does efect us.
December 7th, 2015 at 4:09 PM ^
I root for the B1G in the B1G/ACC Challenge, and in the 1st 2 rds of the NCAA tournament.
Then, in Bowl season I root for 11 of the 14 B1G teams to win their Bowl.
Can anyone REALLY ask any more conference loyalty out of me than that??!!
As for who to root against the least in the CFP - I gotta go Dabo!
December 7th, 2015 at 8:46 PM ^
Except that it is not. For recruits (who dream of going to the NFL), as well as for rankings, and for the playoffs- whether it is the PRESENT system with 4 teams, or in the future when the P5 conference champs earn bearths and there are one or two at-large berths, Michigan might be in a position where SOS and perception of conference strength do make a difference.
December 7th, 2015 at 9:44 PM ^
How many times have recruits said they want to play in the SEC because it's the best league and sends the most players in the NFL. If the Big Ten can put together national champions back to back that narrative will be shut down, and possibly reveresed for good.
That all said -- I think Alabama's going to kill MSU and I'm perfectly fine with that. But I'm not going to view it as some sort of tragedy if MSU pulls off a miracle.
December 8th, 2015 at 6:26 AM ^
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
December 8th, 2015 at 12:02 PM ^
Just like Ole Miss and Miss State and Texas A&M and everybody else benefits from the SEC perception too. It's part of why the Big 10 loses recruits to those schools. Recruits actually SAY this pretty regularly: "I want to play in the best conference in college football."
If OSU and MSU win back to back titles - Michigan, Rutgers, and everyone in between get better recruits. If nothing else, OSU gets a bunch of national profile guys that would otherwise be at USC or Notre Dame or Georgia, which opens up a host of 4-star Ohio kids to the other schools. I'd argue that's been part of what has helped MSU rise up.
December 7th, 2015 at 2:58 PM ^
December 7th, 2015 at 3:17 PM ^
I want to see Bama hang 50 on Sparty.
December 7th, 2015 at 3:51 PM ^
WOW!
THAT'S so not happening!!!
Feel very relieved if Bama just wins Baby, don't fixate on blowouts. I mean, fixate on whatever you want, I guess, but don't put any scratch on that...
December 7th, 2015 at 4:22 PM ^
I don't believe MSU's O-line can keep Cook upright all game. They'll have to compensate with short passes, which Alabama will be all over.
Coker may not be a 1st round draft pick, but he's good enough to exploit MSU's secondary.
MSU is not OSU from last season. LJ Scott is not a game breaker and Cook is one dimensional. Good matchup for Bama. A 50 point win may be unlikely, but a 14-17 point win is possible.
December 7th, 2015 at 4:15 PM ^
December 7th, 2015 at 7:23 PM ^
that is the gif of all gifs.
To finebaum's credit, he did say the big ten is the best conference this year
December 7th, 2015 at 3:37 PM ^
ROLL DAMN TIDE.
I'm rooting for another 49-0 pasting just to shut those %$#$% up.
December 7th, 2015 at 8:48 PM ^
Michigan is far more likely to be competing with Alabama (or Oklahoma) or OSU for 4* and 5* recruits nationally than with Michigan State.
December 7th, 2015 at 2:58 PM ^
December 7th, 2015 at 3:09 PM ^
Which I thought about Bama v. OSU last year. :(
December 7th, 2015 at 3:43 PM ^
MSU has nothing at RB even close to what Bama ran into last year in one Zeke Elliott. No Zeke = No Win. Roll Damn Tide!
December 7th, 2015 at 4:25 PM ^
People forget how hard he was to bring down. Cook is not the same type of player. Bama's D last year was a bit suspect for their standards. This year's defense > last year's defense.
December 7th, 2015 at 3:25 PM ^
December 7th, 2015 at 3:34 PM ^
He does have a history of taking MSU out to a nice seafood dinner and never calling them again.
December 7th, 2015 at 2:58 PM ^
I hope Alabama rolls. I have no conception of how an MSU win could be anything other than bad for M.
FYS.
December 7th, 2015 at 2:58 PM ^
... then root for Clemson/OU to beat Alabama.
December 7th, 2015 at 2:59 PM ^
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
December 7th, 2015 at 2:59 PM ^
Rooting for the Big Ten is highly overrated. I root for what's best for Michigan.
December 7th, 2015 at 2:59 PM ^
Cheer for those pricks in East Lansing . Not after the last 8 years.
December 7th, 2015 at 3:25 PM ^
I can't believe it's even a question that is asked around here.
Really? Roll Tide.