Not me, I prefer the game played on March 4, 2000 to serve as the template for all future games.
But anyway, in the run-up to this one, we've shown you the decade-long comparison of the two programs, and we've summed up the results of the past 25 games in the series. We'll leave you with one more note, the record of Tom Izzo against John Beilein prior to this match-up.
- Izzo leads in games won by a 7-6 margin
- Izzo's teams lead in points scored by a 63-point margin
So, if UM beats MSU by 63 points today, the series will be "even", at least since
Beilein took over at Michigan.
Let's see what happens.
----------
Tweet ****** Click on NO COMMENTS (or # comments) below to enter and view reader comments. ----- Remember to check Spartan Headline links, updated real time, in the left column of SpartanResource.com (Web version only). *****Note: If you are receiving this post via automated email, you need to go to the site to view headline links and embedded videos in this post: http://spartanresource.com/ (Web version only). SIGN UP TO RECEIVE POSTS VIA EMAIL, TWITTER OR FACEBOOK IN THE RIGHT COLUMN.*****
Seriously the excuses are getting old!! out coached, outplayed get over it!
ReplyDeleteYou can't actually find an "excuse" in this article. And yes, MSU was out-played, and therefore, out-coached. Do you feel much better now to see me say this?
DeleteNow, to the point of the article: UM has evened things up in the series, as they are now tied 7-7 in the Beilein Era. Hard to say they are "ahead", as they have been pummeled so many times by MSU that they still trail by 54 points over the past 14 games. But we can call it even at this point in the recent past.
Whatever helps you sleep 82. It'd be a lot easier if you'd just admit that Beilein has Izzo's number right now.
DeleteAs long as you keep saying "right now", you're on track. Beilein won both games this year, congrats.
DeleteYou still talking about history 82?
ReplyDeleteNo sir, this is not "history". In the basketball series, "history" refers to the 20th Century.
DeleteThe past 26 games are the long-term view of the series, including all games played since January 1, 2000.
The past 14 games are the intermediate-term view of the series, including all games played under the current coaches.
The last two or three years comprise the short-term view of the series, and UM leads in games won, though not points scored or overall program accomplishments.
Now enjoy your win, as the better team won. But remember, if you don't want to talk about "history", then you'll have to forget about the UM Rugby teams of the late 1800s when you carry on about the glories of your football team.
Why is it that the Spartans have accomplished more the last three years than Michigan?
ReplyDeleteSparty has a shared regular season B1G title, a B1G tourney title, and three Sweet Sixteens. Michigan has a shared B1G title and a NC runner-up.. Not to mention the Wolverines are 4-2 against the Spartans in that span.
I guess if you prefer Sixteen's to Final Four's than Sparty has accomplished more.
Much of what you said is technically true, thought you're omitting the one-and-done loss to OHIO by UM during that three-year period.
ReplyDeleteBut what if we make it four years, just a silly little year longer to review. Then we see UM missing the tourney with a losing season, and getting bounced in the first and second rounds for a 6-3 overall record in the Big Dance. In that same time-frame, MSU had an 8-4 NCAA Tourney record, and both teams had a Final Four. That seems pretty close.
Or, over the last two seasons, UM was 5-2 in the Big Dance, and MSU was 4-2 in the same tournaments. Both teams with a shared conference title, a 2-2 record against each other, but MSU with a +31-point scoring lead in those four games.
So you can make it look better by choosing three years as your reference point, as long as you concede that the two-year picture and the four-year picture are not nearly as flattering. Five years and beyond look increasingly worse for your team.
But the one-year snapshot looks really good for you right now. You only trail in overall record at this point. Quite a year.
"The last two or three years comprise the short-term view of the series, and UM leads in games won, though not points scored or overall program accomplishments." 82
ReplyDeleteYour words not mine, you dictated the time frame. 2-3 years Michigan has accomplished more.
It's really quite close, depends how you value various factors, but I'm going to leave it with this quick analysis:
Delete-The comment that you're quoting above was basically a rough draft for a longer article that was published about four hours later. It's the article on this web site with a headline that begins with "Michigan Pulls Even..."
-The term "accomplished more" in the context of this web site includes the performance against the rival, and the comment above offers three different time-frames in which to measure that factor. The larger article did not include three years as a specific index.
-The main advantage to hang your UM hat on when you focus on the three year span is the Final Four. You would be going against the majority of your fan base to consider that relevant, as your blue brethren have been chattering for years about how insignificant the MSU Final Fours have been. Happy to grant your precious three-year streak if you will just go ahead and validate our 12-year run. That's the run that ended RIGHT BEFORE YOUR THREE-YEAR COMPARISON BEGINS. See the correlation between when your three-year plan starts and when our TWELVE-YEAR RUN began? That's why we use the term "lately" when you talk about three-year spans.
-By the way, in football, we use the "Dantonio Era" as a time-frame for measurement, so we use the "Beilein Era" the same way. 7-7. I call it "Even" in the larger article, although the Final Four count in that span is 2-1, MSU.