GLENN SCHEMBECHLER HAD EASIER ROAD THAN MARK DANTONIO - PART 4

The fourth in a multi-part series by MSUSpartan76
detailing a variety facts about the illusion of Glenn Schembechler.

A few weeks ago on the UM page of MLive.com, a Skunkbear went on a diatribe about how great Bo Schembechler was and how Mark Dantonio could never be his equal. This poser asserted that Schemp was far superior because of 13 BT Championships in 21 years and Coach Dantonio was genuinely inferior because of only 2 titles in 8 seasons. He managed the simple arithmetic of 13-2 is 11 and 21-8 is 13 and used that to "prove" Coach Dantonio was vastly inferior to Schemp since Coach D. can't win 11 BT titles in 13 seasons.

While some facts were made, this is just another example of chUMp cherry picking and twisting reality to give utter disrespect.

Looking at the total record puts things in a different light.

In Part I the evolution of college football rules was presented, setting the context and relevant factors needed for a fair comparison. We saw the season is longer, there are more bowls and championship games, and teams play more games than they did nearly 50 years ago.
In Part II the overall records were examined. We noted that Shemp got over half his wins over teams with losing season records.
In Part III the bowl records were examined and we saw clearly that Shemp rarely was up to winning the big games.

Now, down to the nitty-gritty: 13-2 and 21-8. That those titles were earned in those long-ago years is factual, but are the titles Shemp received equivalent to the titles Coach Dantonio has and might receive?

To determine this, the conference record is examined. First, the facts:

Statistic	Bo Schembechler	Mark Dantonio	Notes
Conference Titles	5	1
Conference Co-Titles	8	1
Division Titles	0	2	[1]
Conference Record	142-24-3 0.8491	46-20-0 0.6970	[2]
Conference Games/year	8.00	8.25
Perfect BT Record	3	1	[3]

[1] BT CCG, division titles were started and co-championships were eliminated in 2011.
[2] The 1971 UM at MSU game was out-of-conference. The B1G Ten only scheduled 7 conference games that year.
[3] No losses and no ties. Schemp had 2 additional seasons where the conference record was blemished with a single tie.

Trivia questions:

1. What was Schemp's 21-year record versus MSU?
2. What is Coach Dantonio's record versus UM?
3. Who had the easier road?

Answers:

1. Schemp (21 seasons: 0.7955) was 17-4-0 (0.8095) versus MSU (21 seasons: 0.5192).
2. Coach Dantonio (8 seasons: 0.7075) is 6-2-0 (0.7500) versus UM (8 seasons: 0.5446).
3. Schemp

Schemp played fewer conference games per season. The 13 of 21 versus 2 of 8 hides that fact.

The question is: just how good were those conference opponents?

	Bo Schembechler			Mark Dantonio
BT Team	Overall Record	Bowl Eligible Bowl Record	UM versus	Overall Record	Bowl Eligible Bowl Record	MSU versus
All Teams	952-1110-47 0.4625	78 21-28-0	142-24-3 0.8491	737-589-0 0.5558	74 29-41-0	46-20-0 0.6970
Illinois	101-125-8 0.4487	8 1-4-0	19-1-1 0.9286	43-57-0 0.4300	4 2-2-0	3-0-0 1.0000
Indiana	88-142-3 0.3841	6 2-2-0	16-1-0 0.9412	33-64-0 0.3402	1 0-1-0	6-0-0 1.0000
Iowa	112-122-6 0.4792	9 4-4-0	13-3-1 0.7941	60-42-0 0.5882	7 3-3-0	3-4-0 0.4286
Maryland	n/a	n/a	n/a	45-56-0 0.4455	5 2-3-0	1-0-0 1.0000
Michigan	194-48-5 0.7955	21 5-12-0	n/a	55-46-0 0.5446	5 2-3-0	6-2-0 0.7500
Michigan St	118-109-7 0.5192	12 2-3-0	17-4-0 0.8095	75-31-0 0.7075	8 4-4-0	n/a
Minnesota	100-127-5 0.4418	9 1-2-0	19-2-0 0.9048	42-59-0 0.4158	5 0-5-0	4-1-0 0.8000
Nebraska	n/a	n/a	n/a	71-35-0 0.6698	7 3-4-0	2-2-0 0.5000
Northwestern	49-177-3 0.2205	2 0-0-0	14-0-0 1.0000	56-45-0 0.5545	6 1-4-0	5-2-0 0.7143
Ohio St.	181-56-5 0.7583	20 7-10-0	11-9-1 0.5476	88-18-0 0.8302	8 4-4-0	2-4-0 0.3333
Penn St.	n/a	n/a	n/a	69-33-0 0.6765	8 3-3-0	3-2-0 0.6000
Purdue	108-120-4 0.4741	6 3-1-0	16-3-0 0.8421	38-61-0 0.3838	3 2-1-0	6-0-0 1.0000
Rutgers	n/a	n/a	n/a	61-42-0 0.5922	7 5-2-0	1-0-0 1.0000
Wisconsin	95-132-6 0.4206	6 1-2-0	18-1-0 0.9474	76-31-0 0.7103	8 2-6-0	4-3-0 0.5714

Look at the data again. What jumps out?

• Schemp had a winning record against all 7 conference opponents.
• Only 2 of the 7 conference teams had a winning record during the Schemp era.
• Schemp had a perfect record versus 1 conference opponent, Northwestern. Northwestern had a 21 season record of 0.2205.
• Coach Dantonio has a winning record against 10 of 13 conferenct opponents and is 2-2-0 versus Nebraska.
• 9 of the 13 conference opponents have winning records over the past 8 seasons.
• Coach Dantonio has a prefect record versus 5 conference opponents.

The aggregate record of opposing B1G Ten teams during the Schemp era was 952-1110-47 (0.4625). Subtracting out the UM record versus the conference gives 928-967-44 (0.4899). So those 13 B1G Ten titles were "earned" versus conference opponents that, as a whole, gave nobody any real competition. The 21-28 (0.4286) bowl record by Schemp's BT opponents is a reflection of that.

During Schemp's 21 years, only 2 B1G Ten opponents achieved 0.5000 or better season records in 11 or more seasons (greater than half). Ohio State. Michigan State.

The aggregate record of B1G Ten teams during the Dantonio's tenure to date is 737-589-0 (0.5558). Subtracting out the MSU record versus the conference gives 717-543-0 (0.5690). The 2/3 B1G Ten titles were "earned" versus conference opponents that, as a whole, were much more competitive. Note: MSU's conference opponents had a 29-41 (0.4143) bowl record.

The conference opposition Coach Dantonio faced had only 3 teams that failed to achieve a 0.5000 record in 5 or more of the past 8 seasons.

Summarizing:

Schemp's 0.8500 conference record was versus an aggregate 0.4899 record while Dantonio's 0.6970 conference record was versus an aggregate 0.5690 record.

Schemp had more seasons, which were shorter, and his conference opponents were definitely weaker.

Coach Dantonio has adjusted to 2 conference expansions and 2 division realignments, neither of which Schemp had to deal with.

In 4 of his 8 seasons, Coach Dantonio could earn a conference championship only through the CCG. That is another challenge Schemp never faced.

Coach Dantonio's teams played longer seasons and stiffer competition. B1G Ten rule changes kept MSU out of 2 Rose Bowls and prevented Coach Dantonio from hanging a second BT banner. Those are relevant facts.

Schemp's conference opponents were much less successful than those Coach Dantonio has faced. While Schemp has the better overall record and more titles, Coach Dantonio faced much stiffer competition and longer seasons. Even with that schedule, Coach Dantonio bested Schemp's record more than once.

What about the out of conference opponents?

In those 21 seasons, Schemp's teams faced 34 different non-conference opponents racking up a 51-24-2 (0.6753). Those 34 teams over the 21 years had an aggregate record of 4430-3535-148 (0.5552). Subtracting out the UM games, the non-conference opponents record is 4406-3483-146 (0.5574).

In 8 seasons, Dantonio led teams faced 24 different non-conference opponents going 29-11-0 (0.7250). Dantonio's record includes 5 wins over 4 different FCS teams, one of which (2 wins) has recently moved into FBS. Taking the other 3 games out of the conversation, the FBS record is 0.7027. Those 25 teams in the past 8 years have an aggregate record of 1350-1056-0 (0.5611). Without the FCS teams, and subtracting out the MSU record, the non-conference opponents record is 1334-1027-0 (0.5650).

Yes, Schemp has more BT titles. But when one looks at the whole picture, the one thing that is perfectly clear...

Schemp had the easier road.

It isn't over. It will never be over here. It's just starting.

Part 1, The Evolution of College Football Rules.
Part 2, The Season Records.
Part 3, The Bowl Records.
Part 4, The In-conference Records.

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.*****

GLENN SCHEMBECHLER HAD EASIER ROAD THAN MARK DANTONIO - PART 3

The third in a multi-part series by MSUSpartan76

detailing a variety facts about the illusion of Glenn Schembechler

A few weeks ago on the UM page of MLive.com, a Skunkbear went on a diatribe about how great Bo Schembechler was and how Mark Dantonio could never be his equal. This poser asserted that Schemp was far superior because of 13 BT Championships in 21 years and Coach Dantonio was genuinely inferior because of only 2 titles in 8 seasons. He managed the simple arithmetic of 13-2 is 11 and 21-8 is 13 and used that to "prove" Coach Dantonio was vastly inferior to Schemp since Coach D. can't win 11 BT title in 13 seasons.

While some facts were made, this is just another example of chUMp cherry picking and twisting reality to give utter disrespect.

Looking at the total record puts things in a different light.

In Part I the evolution of college football rules was presented, setting the context and relevant factors needed for a fair comparison. We saw the season is longer, there are more bowls and championship games, and teams play more games than they did nearly 50 years ago.

In Part II the overall records were examined. We noted that Shemp got over half his wins over teams with losing season records.

In this part, the bowl record is examined. First, the facts:

Statistic	Bo Schembechler	Mark Dantonio	Notes
NC Titles	0	0	[1]
versus NC opponents	0-5	0-1	[2]
Bowl Appearances	17 of 21 (80.9%)	8 of 8 (100%)	[3]
Bowl Record	5-12-0 0.2941	4-4-0 0.5000
Rose Bowl	2-8-0	1-0-0
"BCS" Bowls	3-10-0	2-0-0	[4]
Bowl Game Streak	15	8
Bowl Win Streak	2	4
Bowl Loss Streak	5	4

[1] Starting in 1998, the National Championship was awarded based on a designated game that also eliminated co-championships. In 2014, the NC title was won by winning 2 games in a 4 team playoff.

[2] The Spartans led by Coach Dantonio not only faced the National Championship Playoff winner but also the NCG runner-up both in the same season.

[3] Prior to 1975, the B1G Ten restricted post-season bowl appearances. Schemp's bowl streak started with the 1975 season. UM was bowl eligible in all 21 seasons Schemp was coach.

[4] The term "BCS" is used for comparative purposes and includes appearances in the Rose, Fiesta, Orange, or Sugar Bowls. The BCS was in existence from 1998 through 2013.

Why is this relevant?

Post season bowls give national exposure to football programs. Post season bowls extend the season for teams selected both by providing one more game but also for the extra practices the team is allocated. These factors give teams competitive advantages in recruiting, alumni donations, and development over teams that stay home.

The most significant factor is the number of teams playing in bowl games. In modern times, more teams benefit from the extra practice, the game itself, and the shorter time between the end of one season and the next, and this results in a higher overall level of competition in college football.

In context, prior to the division split in 1976, 250 or so teams vied for the 11/12 bowls or about 10% of all teams played in the post season. In present time, 128 teams vie for the 38 bowls; nearly 6 in 10.

Breaking it down:

	Bo Schembechler			Mark Dantonio
Category	Bowl Eligible (%)	Bowls Played (%)	Bowl Record	Bowl Eligible (%)	Bowls Played (%)	Bowl Record (WL%)	Notes
Team	21 (100%)	17 (81.0%)	5-12-0 0.2941	8 (100%)	8 (100%)	4-4-0 0.5000	[1]
B1G Opponents	78 (43.3%)	49 (25.9%)	21-28-0 0.4286	74 (71.2%)	69 (66.3%)	29-41-0 0.4143	[1]
OOC Opponents	429 (60.1%)	264 (37.0%)	138-118-8 0.5379	129 (67.2%)	101 (52.6%)	55-46-0 0.5446	[2]
All Opponents	507 (56.1%)	313 (34.7%)	159-146-8 0.5208	203 (68.8%)	170 (57.4%)	84-87-0 0.4912	[2]

[1] Prior to 1975, the B1G Ten restricted post-season bowl appearances.
[2] Includes bowl games played versus UM/MSU.

From 1969 through 1989 there were 303 post season bowl games or an average of 14.4 bowls per year.

• 1969 thru 1977: 11, 12 or 13 bowls
• 1978 thru 1983: 15 or 16 bowls
• 1984 thru 1989: 18 bowls

From 2007 to present there were 279 post season bowl games or an average of 34.9 bowls per year.

• 2007: 32 bowls
• 2008 thru 2009: 34 bowls
• 2010 thru 2013: 35 bowls
• 2014: 38 bowls plus the NC game

As an aside...

• Schemp played 8 of the 13 teams that won NC or co-NC titles during his 21 years (19 of 26 titles). Schemp went 0-5 versus the seasons' NC teams.
• Coach Dantonio played 2 of the 6 teams that won NC titles in the past 8 seasons (4 of 8 titles). Coach Dantonio went 0-1 versus the seasons' NC teams.

Now, for the rest of the story. The Schemp era bowl record was 5-12-0, 2-8-0 in the Rose Bowl, 3-10-0 in "BCS" bowls.

• 6 bowls versus teams with a better regular season record, 1-5 (0.1667)
• 2 bowls versus teams with an equal regular season record, 2-0 (1.0000)
• 9 bowls versus teams with a worse regular season record, 2-7 (0.2222)

Dantonio is currently 4-4-0 in bowl games, 1-0-0 in the Rose Bowl, 2-0-0 in BCS bowls.

• 4 bowls versus teams with a better regular season record, 2-2 (0.5000)
• 1 bowls versus teams with an equal regular season record, 1-0 (1.0000)
• 3 bowls versus teams with a worse regular season record, 1-2 (0.3333)

The take-aways?

• The percentage of B1G Ten teams that were bowl eligible during the past 8 seasons was much greater than during the Schemp era.
• A much greater percentage of Coach Dantonio's opponents benefitted from post-season bowl games than Schemp's opponents.
• Coach Dantonio is much more successful in post-season bowls, than Schemp ever was.
• Coach Dantonio faced superior opponents in half of his bowls and posted a 0.5000 record.
• Schemp faced superior opponents in only 1/3 of his bowls and posted a 0.1667 record.

Schemp was adept at trouncing weak opponents, but when it came right down to it, Schemp just could not win the big games, at least not on a regular basis, even though...

Schemp had the easier road.

We are heading towards the finish line - 13 versus 2 Big Ten Championships...

Part 1, The Evolution of College Football Rules.

Part 2, The Total Records.

Part 3, The Bowl Records.

Part 4, The In-conference Records. (coming soon)

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.*****

GLENN SCHEMBECHLER HAD EASIER ROAD THAN MARK DANTONIO - PART 2

The second in a multi-part series by MSUSpartan76

detailing a variety facts about the illusion of Glenn Schembechler

A few weeks ago on the UM page of MLive.com, a Skunkbear went on a diatribe about how great Bo Schembechler was and how Mark Dantonio could never be his equal. This poser asserted that Schemp was far superior because of 13 BT Championships in 21 years and Coach Dantonio was genuinely inferior because of only 2 titles in 8 seasons. He managed the simple arithmetic of 13-2 is 11 and 21-8 is 13 and used that to "prove" Coach Dantonio was vastly inferior to Schemp since Coach D. can't possibly win eleven of the next thirteen conference championships.

While some facts were made, this is just another example of chUMp cherry picking and twisting reality to give utter disrespect.

Looking at the total record puts things in a different light.

In Part I the evolution of college football rules was presented, setting the context and relevant factors needed for a fair comparison. We saw the season is longer, there are more bowls and championship games, and teams play more games than they did nearly 50 years ago.

In this part, the total record is examined. The facts:

Statistic	Bo Schembechler	Mark Dantonio	Notes
Seasons	1969-1989 (21)	2007-2014 (8)	[1]
Record	194-48-5 0.7955	75-31-0 0.7075
Average Games/year	11.76	13.25
Undefeated Seasons	0	0	[2]
Longest Season	11-2-0 0.8462	13-1-0 0.9286
Best Season	11-1-0 0.9167 bowl: L	13-1-0 0.9286 bowl: W CCG: W
Worst Season	6-6-0 0.5000 bowl: L	6-7-0 0.4615 bowl: L
10+ Win Seasons	11 of 21 52.4%	4 of 8 50.0%

[1] Dantonio is entering his 9th season.

[2] Schemp's 1973 record was 10-0-1, which technically counts as undefeated. Schemp's 1971 record was 11-0 in regular season play. Season ended with a bowl loss.

What are the take-aways from this data-base?

• Schemp has the better record, but with 13 more seasons, Coach Dantonio will have coached 12 more games, not including any future bowls or championship games.
• Coach Dantonio has coached the best season.
• Coach Dantonio has coached the longest season.
• The percentage of 10+ win seasons is nearly the same. If the Spartans post 10 or more wins in 2015, Coach Dantonio will best Schemp in that category, too.
• Both had a 6-win worst season. Both lost the bowl game.

Schemp achieved a 0.7955 winning percentage with a 194-48-5. For Coach Dantonio to match or better that, the Spartans will have a 21-year record of 220-55-0. Given all of the next 13 years in this scenario, a bowl game would be played every year.

Schemp achieved his record with an average of 9.24 wins per year. Coach Dantonio achieved his record with an average of 9.375 wins per year. Because of the number of games played in the game today, to match Schemp's winning percentage, Coach Dantonio will need a 21-year average of 10.47 wins per year.

But there is more: Strength of schedule.

Statistic	Bo Schembechler	Mark Dantonio	Notes
Opponents	43	37
Opponents' 21-yr Aggregate Record	5382-4645-195 0.5360	2163-1676-0 0.5634
Opponents w/ 21-yr Winning Records	23 (53.5%)	24 (64.9%)
Team Record vs. Winning Records	13-7-3 (0.6304)	15-7-2 (0.6667)
Game Record vs. "Winning Teams"	57-36-2 (0.6105)	42-29-0 (0.5915)
Opponents w/ 21-yr Losing Records	20 (46.5%)	13 (35.1%)
Team Record vs. Losing Records	18-0-2 (0.9500)	12-1-0 (0.9231)
Game Record vs. "Losing Teams"	137-12-3 (0.9112)	33-2-0 (0.9429)
FCS Opponents (games)	0	4 (5)	[1]

[1] 3 of the 4 FCS opponents MSU has played have 8-year winning records. In 4 of 5 games the FCS opponent had a winning season when MSU played them. 1 of the 4 teams (2 games) is now a FBS program.

Schemp faced 43 different opponents in his 21 seasons. 23 (53.5%) of those teams posted a 21-year aggregate winning record. Schemp had winning records versus 13 (56.5%) of those teams. Coach Dantonio has faced 37 different opponents in his 8 seasons. 24 (64.9%) of those teams have aggregate winning records during Coach Dantonio's tenure and the Spartans have winning records versus 15 (62.5%) of those teams.

Schemp posted perfect records versus 21 opponents (48.8%). His best showing was 14-0-0 versus Northwestern. Northwestern's 0.2205 record in that 21-year span ranked 43rd of the 43 opponents. Coach Dantonio has so far posted perfect records versus 21 opponents (56.8%). His best showing was versus Purdue at 6-0-0. Purdue's 0.3838 record for the past 8 years ranks 32nd of the 38 opponents faced to date.

20 of Schemp's opponents (46.5%) had 21-year losing records and Schemp had a winning record versus 18 (90.0%) of them. Coach Dantonio has faced 13 teams with 8-year losing records and has winning records versus 12 (92.3%) of them. Schemp's worst showing was 0-1-0 versus North Carolina. UNC was 0.5806 during the 21-year span. UNC was 8-3-1 and UM was 8-4-0 the season they played. Coach Dantonio's worst showing was 0-1-0 versus California. California is 0.4500 over the past 8 seasons and both schools achieved 9-4-0 records the season they met.

Only 2 teams (4.6%) Schemp faced had better 21-year records than UM. Schemp went 1-1-0 versus them. In comparison, 6 teams (16.2%) Coach Dantonio has faced have better records over the 8 years he has been at MSU. Coach Dantonio is 9-10-0 versus those teams. 4 of those 6 teams have better overall records than Schemp's two best opponents. Georgia has posted the same record and MSU under Coach Dantonio is 1-1-0 versus the Bulldogs. Both were bowl games.

It's clear from the data that Schemp's opponents were less successful than those Coach Dantonio has faced. While Schemp has the better overall record, Coach Dantonio faced a measureably more difficult schedule and even with that schedule bested Schemp's record more than once.

Breaking it down by season wins and losses:

	Bo Schembechler				Mark Dantonio
Opponent Season Wins	Games Played	% of Total Games	Record	W-L %	Games Played	% of Total Games	Record	W-L %
0-4	90	37.2%	90-1-1	0.9837	26	24.5%	25-1-0	0.9615
5-9	130	52.6%	100-27-3	0.7808	54	50.9%	41-13-0	0.7593
10-15	25	10.1%	4-20-1	0.1800	26	24.5%	9-17-0	0.3462
Opponent Season Losses	Games Played	% of Total Games	Record	W-L %	Games Played	% of Total Games	Record	W-L %
8-12	48	19.4%	48-0-0	1.0000	26	24.5%	25-1-0	0.9615
3-7	166	67.2%	144-22-4	0.8554	65	61.3%	44-21-0	0.6769
0-2	33	13.4%	6-26-1	0.1970	15	14.2%	6-9-0	0.4000

To make a fair comparison, the 11-game season versus 12-game season has to be factored in. Schemp faced 25 teams (10.1% of games played) that had 10 or more wins in the season they played. 4-20-1 (0.1800). Coach Dantonio has faced 18 (17.0%) with 11 or more wins in the season. 7-11-0 (0.3889).

What's the takeaway?

4-20-1, 6-26-1: Seems like Schemp just could not win the big games, at least not on a regular basis.

Breaking it down by season win-loss record:

	Bo Schembechler				Mark Dantonio
Opponent Winning %	Games Played	% Total Games	Record	W-L %	Games Played	% Total Games	Record	W-L %
0.0000-0.2999	50	20.2%	50-0-0	1.0000	18	17.0%	18-0-0	1.0000
0.3000-0.4999	74	30.0%	71-2-1	0.9662	19	17.9%	17-2-0	0.8947
0.5000-0.7999	95	38.5%	69-23-3	0.7421	54	50.9%	34-20-0	0.6296
0.8000-1.0000	28	11.3%	4-23-1	0.1607	15	14.2%	6-9-0	0.4000

Trivia questions:

1. How many winless teams did Schemp play?
2. How many winless teams did Coach Dantonio play?
3. Who had the easier road?

Answers:

1. 6: Illinois (1969); Iowa (1973); Northwestern (1978, 1980, 1981); Indiana (1984).
2. Zero. None.
3. Schemp.

Read on...

In the modern context, to qualify as bowl eligible, teams need a 0.5000 regular season record or better. Whether an 11 or 12 game season, bowl eligible teams had to win 6 or more games.

In his 21 seasons, Schemp faced 43 different opponents in 247 games, including bowl games. Only 123 (49.8%) games were played versus opponents that would have been bowl eligible today. Schemp was 73-46-4 (0.6098) versus bowl eligible teams and 121-2-1 (0.9798) versus teams with losing season records. Schemp did carry on the UM tradition of beating up weak opponents.

In 8 seasons, Coach Dantonio has faced 37 different opponents in 106 games, including bowl and championship games. In 69 (65.1%) of those games, the opponents were bowl eligible. Coach Dantonio has compiled a 40-29-0 (0.5797) record versus bowl eligible teams and 35-2-0 (0.9459) versus teams with losing season records.

Taking it down a notch, 27.5% of the teams Schemp faced had seasons no worse than 1 fewer wins than UM. The record was 29-38-1 (0.4338). 46.2% of Coach Dantonio's opponents had seasons no worse than 1 fewer wins when they played. MSU, so far, is 23-26-0 (0.4694).

In his 21 seasons, Schemp played 43 games (17.4%) against teams that had season records equal to or better than UM in the season they played. Schemp went 12-30-1 (0.2907) versus peer competition. Schemp was 182-18-4 (0.9020) versus inferior competition.

In 8 seasons, Coach Dantonio has played 39 games (36.8%) versus teams with equal or better season records compiling a 16-23-0 (0.4103) record. Versus the less successful teams, Coach Dantonio was 59-8-0 (0.8806). Coach Dantonio is playing more than twice the number of games per season against elite competition with a better win-loss record.

No question about it...

Schemp had the easier road.

But wait! There's more:

Part 1 -  The Evolution of College Football Rules.

Part 2 -  The Total Records.

Part 3 -  The Bowl Records.

Part 4 -  The In-conference Records.

----------

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.*****

GLENN SCHEMBECHLER HAD EASIER ROAD THAN MARK DANTONIO - PART 1

The first in a multi-part series by MSUSpartan76

detailing a variety facts about the illusion of Glenn Schembechler

A few weeks ago on the UM page of MLive.com, a Skunkbear went on a diatribe about how great Bo Schembechler was and how Mark Dantonio could never be his equal. This poser asserted that "Schemp" was far superior because of 13 BT Championships in 21 years and Coach Dantonio was genuinely inferior because of only 2 titles in 8 seasons. He managed the simple arithmetic of 13-2 is 11 and 21-8 is 13 and used that to "prove" Coach Dantonio was vastly inferior to Schemp since Coach D. can't win 11 BT titles in 13 seasons.

While some supporting facts were offered, this is just another example of chUMp cherry-picking and twisting reality to give utter disrespect. What are the facts?

• Schemp coached 21 seasons at UM. True.
• Schemp had 13 BT Championships. False. Schemp had 5 BT Championships and 8 Co-Championships.
• Dantonio has coached 8 seasons at MSU. True.
• Dantonio has 2 BT Championships. False. Dantonio has 1 BT Championship and 1 Co-Championship.

No difference? Many have claimed that a Co-Championship counts only as 1/2. Combining them takes a narrow point of view in order to deflect from reality. But that is not the reason for the breakdown.

 "Foul!" they cry. "Schemp had 13 and Dantonio only has 2. There are no other relevant factors!"

Ok. Let's consider another fact. MSU under Coach Dantonio had a 13-win season. Schemp never did.

 "Foul!" they cry. Schemp only had 1 season with 13 games and never had a season with more than that.

In his first 8 seasons as UM head coach, Schemp won 76 games and had 1 outright BT title, 5 co-championships and went to 3 Rose Bowls (0-3). In his first 8 seasons, Coach Dantonio won 75 games and had 1 BT championship, 1 co-championship and went to 1 Rose Bowl (1-0). Due to rules changes, MSU missed 2 Rose Bowls and 1 outright conference championship getting a Division Title instead.

 "Foul!" they cry. That's cherry picking. 76 wins versus 75 wins is not the complete record. And you can't take credit for things that did not happen!

How about this, then? In his first 8 seasons, Schemp was 0-4 in bowl games. In his first 8 seasons, Coach Dantonio is 4-4.

 "Foul!" they cry. The conference only allowed the Rose Bowl and did not allow back-to-back appearances. Not a fair comparison.

Not a fair comparison? Exactly my point. There are a lot of things that are different now than then and they all are relevant and need to be addressed to make a fair comparison. For example:

• 1969 - 11 Bowl Games were played.
• 1971 - NCAA went to an 11-game regular season. Prior to that, only 10 games were scheduled. The season was expanded to 12 games in 2006.
• 1972 - B1G Ten allowed teams to repeat in the Rose Bowl. Prior to that, teams could only go once every 2 years if they won consecutive conference titles.
• 1975 - B1G Ten allowed teams to participate in all bowls. The restriction of 1 B1G Ten team in just the Rose Bowl was lifted.
• 1976 - NCAA split Division I into IA (now called FBS) and IAA (now called FCS). The division was based on stadium capacity.
• 1982 - B1G Ten went to 9 conference games. In 1985, the conference schedule returned to 8 games.
• 1986 - UM played a 12th game under the NCAA provisions of the Hawaii rule.
• 1992 - Bowl Coalition was founded. A national championship was the goal, but it did not happen.
• 1993 - Penn St. joined the B1G Ten.
• 1995 - Bowl Alliance replaced the Bowl Coalition. A national championship was the goal, but it did not happen.
• 1996 - NCAA eliminated ties by implementing overtime.
• 1998 - The Bowl Championship Series replaced the Bowl Alliance and the first post season NCAA championship game eliminated championships by acclaim (i.e. polls).
• 2006 - NCAA went to a 12-game regular season.
• 2010 - B1G Ten changed the conference championship tiebreaker rules and included the BCS ranking.
• 2011 - Nebraska joined the B1G Ten. The conference split into divisions and implemented a conference championship game.
• 2014 - Maryland and Rutgers joined the B1G Ten. The conference realigned the divisions.
• 2014 - NCAA went to a 4-team championship series to determine the national champion.
• 2014 - 39 Bowl games were played, including the 3 bowls involved with the 4-team championship series
• 2016 - B1G Ten will go to a 9-game conference schedule.

The rules changes are tabulated below.

Years	Regular Season gms	OT?	B1G Ten Teams	B1G Ten gms	BCS Rank As B1G Ten Tiebreaker?	B1G Ten CCG? [1]	Repeat Rose?	BT Bowls	NCG?	4-team NCG?
1969-1970	10	N	10	7	N	N	N	Rose	N	N
1971-1971	11	N	10	7	N	N	N	Rose	N	N
1972-1974	11	N	10	8	N	N	Y	Rose	N	N
1975-1982	11	N	10	8	N	N	Y	All	N	N
1982-1984	11	N	10	9	N	N	Y	All	N	N
1985-1989	11	N	10	8	N	N	Y	All	N	N
1990-1992	11	N	10	8	N	N	Y	All	N	N
1993-1995	11	N	11	8	N	N	Y	All	N	N
1996-1997	11	Y	11	8	N	N	Y	All	N	N
1998-2005	11	Y	11	8	N	N	Y	All	Y	N
2006-2006	12	Y	11	8	N	N	Y	All	Y	N
2007-2009	12	Y	11	8	N	N	Y	All	Y	N
2010-2010	12	Y	11	8	Y	N	Y	All	Y	N
2011-2013	12	Y	12	8	Y	Y	Y	All	Y	N
2014-2015	12	Y	14	8	Y	Y	Y	All	Y	Y
2016-????	12	Y	14	9	Y	Y	Y	All	Y	Y

[1] When the B1G Ten inaugurated the CCG it eliminated Co-Championships and conference tiebreakers, but implemented Division Titles and division tiebreaker rules.

Footnotes:

• The UM-MSU game in 1971 was a non-conference game (UM won).
• The tiebreaker rules changed in the spring prior to the 2010 season. This change cost MSU the 2010 Rose Bowl trip; by the old rules, MSU would have gone. The vote was 10-1 with the sole dissenting vote cast by Coach Dantonio.
• The divisions and CCG implemented in 2011 cost MSU an outright BT championship. As a side note: Wisconsin was given the win in the inaugural BT CCG by a questionable call on an obvious flop. 
• An oddity of the CCG/divisions format occurred in 2012.Wisconsin won and took the BT Title but had a 4-4 regular season conference record. That is something that never could have happened with Schemp.

In today's world, a BT title comes through a championship game. So, if MSU wins 11 BT titles in the next 13 seasons, Coach Dantonio would have 12 outright titles versus Schemp's 5. Schemp never had to face the BT CCG.

What would be equitable? Counting Co-BTs as 1/2, Schemp has 9 points and Dantonio has 1.5. Add to this, MSU has a division title, which was harder to get with 8 conference games than the banner Schemp got facing only 7 BT teams. Count the division title as a 1/2 point, too. MSU winning 7 BT CCGs would bring the title score to 9 each and the MSU titles would be worth more than Schemp's by virtue of more conference games and the CCG. Still, 7 BT CCGs in 13 seasons in today's world is a daunting task, but not out of reach.

This season it is 9 but starting next year all BT champions will have played 10 conference opponents. Schemp faced an average of 8 conference opponents.

Coach Dantonio has never faced less than 12 regular season opponents. All future BT championships will come by playing 13 games. Only once did Schemp face 12 regular season opponents and never more than that.

Schemp had one 13 game season. All of Dantonio's seasons have been 13 or more (14 in 2011 and 2013).

It's clear from the rules that football today is more demanding and reaching the top has bigger challenges. The 13 of 21 versus 2 of 8 rant fails to address those facts.

No question about it...

Schemp had the easier road.

This is not the end of the story. Nor is it the beginning of the end. It is merely the end of the beginning.

Part 1, The Evolution of College Football Rules.

Part 2, The Total Records. (coming soon)

Part 3, The Bowl Records. (coming soon)

Part 4, The In-conference Records. (coming soon)

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.*****

SCHEMP HAD THE EASIER ROAD - PART 1

A few weeks ago on the UM page of MLive.com, a Skunkbear went on a diatribe about how great Bo Schembechler was and how Mark Dantonio could never be his equal. This poser asserted that "Schemp" was far superior because of 13 BT Championships in 21 years and Coach Dantonio was genuinely inferior because of only 2 titles in 8 seasons. He managed the simple arithmetic of 13-2 is 11 and 21-8 is 13 and used that to "prove" Coach Dantonio was vastly inferior to Schemp since Coach D. can't win 11 BT titles in 13 seasons.

While some supporting facts were offered, this is just another example of chUMp cherry-picking and twisting reality to give utter disrespect. What are the facts?

• Schemp coached 21 seasons at UM. True.
• Schemp had 13 BT Championships. False. Schemp had 5 BT Championships and 8 Co-Championships.
• Dantonio has coached 8 seasons at MSU. True.
• Dantonio has 2 BT Championships. False. Dantonio has 1 BT Championship and 1 Co-Championship.

No difference? Many have claimed that a Co-Championship counts only as 1/2. Combining them takes a narrow point of view in order to deflect from reality. But that is not the reason for the breakdown.

 "Foul!" they cry. "Schemp had 13 and Dantonio only has 2. There are no other relevant factors!"

Ok. Let's consider another fact. MSU under Coach Dantonio had a 13-win season. Schemp never did.

 "Foul!" they cry. Schemp only had 1 season with 13 games and never had a season with more than that.

In his first 8 seasons as UM head coach, Schemp won 76 games and had 1 outright BT title, 5 co-championships and went to 3 Rose Bowls (0-3). In his first 8 seasons, Coach Dantonio won 75 games and had 1 BT championship, 1 co-championship and went to 1 Rose Bowl (1-0). Due to rules changes, MSU missed 2 Rose Bowls and 1 outright conference championship getting a Division Title instead.

 "Foul!" they cry. That's cherry picking. 76 wins versus 75 wins is not the complete record. And you can't take credit for things that did not happen!

How about this, then? In his first 8 seasons, Schemp was 0-4 in bowl games. In his first 8 seasons, Coach Dantonio is 4-4.

 "Foul!" they cry. The conference only allowed the Rose Bowl and did not allow back-to-back appearances. Not a fair comparison.

Not a fair comparison? Exactly my point. There are a lot of things that are different now than then and they all are relevant and need to be addressed to make a fair comparison. For example:

• 1969 - 11 Bowl Games were played.
• 1971 - NCAA went to an 11-game regular season. Prior to that, only 10 games were scheduled. The season was expanded to 12 games in 2006.
• 1972 - B1G Ten allowed teams to repeat in the Rose Bowl. Prior to that, teams could only go once every 2 years if they won consecutive conference titles.
• 1975 - B1G Ten allowed teams to participate in all bowls. The restriction of 1 B1G Ten team in just the Rose Bowl was lifted.
• 1976 - NCAA split Division I into IA (now called FBS) and IAA (now called FCS). The division was based on stadium capacity.
• 1982 - B1G Ten went to 9 conference games. In 1985, the conference schedule returned to 8 games.
• 1986 - UM played a 12th game under the NCAA provisions of the Hawaii rule.
• 1992 - Bowl Coalition was founded. A national championship was the goal, but it did not happen.
• 1993 - Penn St. joined the B1G Ten.
• 1995 - Bowl Alliance replaced the Bowl Coalition. A national championship was the goal, but it did not happen.
• 1996 - NCAA eliminated ties by implementing overtime.
• 1998 - The Bowl Championship Series replaced the Bowl Alliance and the first post season NCAA championship game eliminated championships by acclaim (i.e. polls).
• 2006 - NCAA went to a 12-game regular season.
• 2010 - B1G Ten changed the conference championship tiebreaker rules and included the BCS ranking.
• 2011 - Nebraska joined the B1G Ten. The conference split into divisions and implemented a conference championship game.
• 2014 - Maryland and Rutgers joined the B1G Ten. The conference realigned the divisions.
• 2014 - NCAA went to a 4-team championship series to determine the national champion.
• 2014 - 39 Bowl games were played, including the 3 bowls involved with the 4-team championship series
• 2016 - B1G Ten will go to a 9-game conference schedule.

The rules changes are tabulated below.

Years	Regular Season gms	OT?	B1G Ten Teams	B1G Ten gms	BCS Rank As B1G Ten Tiebreaker?	B1G Ten CCG? [1]	Repeat Rose?	BT Bowls	NCG?	4-team NCG?
1969-1970	10	N	10	7	N	N	N	Rose	N	N
1971-1971	11	N	10	7	N	N	N	Rose	N	N
1972-1974	11	N	10	8	N	N	Y	Rose	N	N
1975-1982	11	N	10	8	N	N	Y	All	N	N
1982-1984	11	N	10	9	N	N	Y	All	N	N
1985-1989	11	N	10	8	N	N	Y	All	N	N
1990-1992	11	N	10	8	N	N	Y	All	N	N
1993-1995	11	N	11	8	N	N	Y	All	N	N
1996-1997	11	Y	11	8	N	N	Y	All	N	N
1998-2005	11	Y	11	8	N	N	Y	All	Y	N
2006-2006	12	Y	11	8	N	N	Y	All	Y	N
2007-2009	12	Y	11	8	N	N	Y	All	Y	N
2010-2010	12	Y	11	8	Y	N	Y	All	Y	N
2011-2013	12	Y	12	8	Y	Y	Y	All	Y	N
2014-2015	12	Y	14	8	Y	Y	Y	All	Y	Y
2016-????	12	Y	14	9	Y	Y	Y	All	Y	Y

[1] When the B1G Ten inaugurated the CCG it eliminated Co-Championships and conference tiebreakers, but implemented Division Titles and division tiebreaker rules.

Footnotes:

• The UM-MSU game in 1971 was a non-conference game (UM won).
• The tiebreaker rules changed in the spring prior to the 2010 season. This change cost MSU the 2010 Rose Bowl trip; by the old rules, MSU would have gone. The vote was 10-1 with the sole dissenting vote cast by Coach Dantonio.
• The divisions and CCG implemented in 2011 cost MSU an outright BT championship. As a side note: Wisconsin was given the win in the inaugural BT CCG by a questionable call on an obvious flop. 
• An oddity of the CCG/divisions format occurred in 2012.Wisconsin won and took the BT Title but had a 4-4 regular season conference record. That is something that never could have happened with Schemp.

In today's world, a BT title comes through a championship game. So, if MSU wins 11 BT titles in the next 13 seasons, Coach Dantonio would have 12 outright titles versus Schemp's 5. Schemp never had to face the BT CCG.

What would be equitable? Counting Co-BTs as 1/2, Schemp has 9 points and Dantonio has 1.5. Add to this, MSU has a division title, which was harder to get with 8 conference games than the banner Schemp got facing only 7 BT teams. Count the division title as a 1/2 point, too. MSU winning 7 BT CCGs would bring the title score to 9 each and the MSU titles would be worth more than Schemp's by virtue of more conference games and the CCG. Still, 7 BT CCGs in 13 seasons in today's world is a daunting task, but not out of reach.

This season it is 9 but starting next year all BT champions will have played 10 conference opponents. Schemp faced an average of 8 conference opponents.

Coach Dantonio has never faced less than 12 regular season opponents. All future BT championships will come by playing 13 games. Only once did Schemp face 12 regular season opponents and never more than that.

Schemp had one 13 game season. All of Dantonio's seasons have been 13 or more (14 in 2011 and 2013).

It's clear from the rules that football today is more demanding and reaching the top has bigger challenges. The 13 of 21 versus 2 of 8 rant fails to address those facts.

No question about it...

Schemp had the easier road.

This is not the end of the story. Nor is it the beginning of the end. It is merely the end of the beginning.

Part 1, The Evolution of College Football Rules.

Part 2, The Total Records. (coming soon)

Part 3, The Bowl Records. (coming soon)

Part 4, The In-conference Records. (coming soon)

----------

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.*****

AFTER "COMPLETION", ARE YOU REALLY READY FOR SOME FOOTBALL?

Wow. What a strange college football off-season. In the past, there was a sense of unfinished business, the need to right the wrongs of the past season and even decades of MSU football (or chUMp mythology), the need to scratch and claw for progress - for that seat at the table, for respect.

In the past, I eagerly awaited each verbal commitment from a recruit and kicked the dirt when programs from out of state or Ann Arbor scored on a kid "we" wanted. I would follow the National Signing Day (why is that capitalized nowadays?) as if it were a crystal ball into the future of the Spartan program. Every transfer, surgery, rehab, off-field transgression, or news of a kid being "a beast" meant something to me. Every negative or positive article about Spartans football or spring practice, and every reader comment, every inaccurate perception, every lie or painful truth increased or decreased the chances of getting more/better recruits - at least in my mind. It was dramatic, fun and maddening all at once. Then summer would arrive and I would long for fall to rush in, introducing a new Spartans football team and a new hope that all would righted "this year" with a magical season (which to me meant more/better recruits again). It was a vicious, seemingly never ending annual cycle.

Then, on January 1, 2014, at the culmination of 2013 football season, our coach, Mark Dantonio, uttered the words that crushed the head of that crazy, ongoing, MSU football fan grind - that grind which almost became my identity and was the very soul for thousands of Spartans fans. Coach D was asked what the Rose Bowl victory (and by default, the whole magical season) meant. His answer? "Completion. Completion." He said it twice as if to stomp on the head of the snake and then to grind it into the ground, leaving no doubt - that the evil annual ritual was dead.

Or does it only seem like that? 

This off season was different for me. I was not attached to every move, every development, verbal commitment, NSD, spring practice, the manufactured drama of summer news posts about "my" team or that other team. For the first time, I'm not really sure I'm ready for it to all start again. It has been so peaceful, so... complete. No longer does success at MSU seem like a temporary experience. No longer do Spartans need to put chUMps in their place when they rear their arrogant heads and say something stupid. They are already in their place. Even most chUMps are asking fellow chUMps to dUMp the Little Brother references (although we all know it will be quick to re-appear at the first opportunity). No longer does the perception of off-field issues plague the program like it does most every other program including the problems hitting the team down the road. Even if  there is headline tomorrow about a stupid thing an MSU player did, it is undeniable that Coach Dantonio runs a tight ship. No longer do we squabble about where or IF the Spartans deserve to be ranked in the pre-season top 25. It's a "just win baby" world now. No longer do I have this drive to post my opinions on-line or even on my own blog. The team's success did all the talking that was necessary. We have experienced "completion". Or at least it feels like that in so many ways. 

Was it just me or is this puzzling calm something others experienced too?

We all know the truth. MD prophesied, "It's not over. It will never be over here."

So, my personal psychoanalysis makes me wonder. How many other fans experienced what I have this off season? Is there a part of that "completion" feeling deep in the psyche of players and/or coaches? How will it effect performance? While the media builds it up, something about it seems conspired. There are a lot of teams with high expectations. They all can't get "there". How many times have we seen teams tabbed as one of the best teams ever - or best in the last decade lose a game or two - or three? How will the Spartans players and fans handle the first let down (if there is one) and the second or third? No one is tabbing MSU football as the best college football team in the past decade, yet it seems fans and media alike are forgetting that a two or three loss season may be just as likely - or even more likely - than a one loss or undefeated season. Is it totally outrageous to think that MSU could lose at Oregon and at Penn State in the last game of the year PLUS a game in between (Nebraska, UM, tOSU or a less likely suspect)? Some of the media are catching on to the potential big let down as described HERE, but they are a voice in the wilderness.

• So how has last year's success and the general health of the program affected your off-season psyche?
• What would the Spartans need to accomplish to EXCEED your expectations?
• What results would get us into real bummer territory?
• Are you really ready for some football?
• Check back with SpartanResource.com to read the reactions from M-Live frequent comment contributors ATownAndDown, MSUspartan76 and others.

See MSUspartan76's response HERE
See ATownAndDown's response HERE


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.*****

VIDEO - MSU FOOTBALL FRONT BURNER: Beyond the Rose Bowl, Part 2 and Video Highlights

ROSE BOWL CHAMPIONS EDITION
Our weekly feature on MSU Football brings diverse responses to
a variety of questions related to the Spartans program. 

Front-Burner was published in three parts between the B1G Championship and the Rose Bowl

Part 1. B1G Championship Game Discussion
Part 2. MSU 2013 Season Discussion
           2A. ATownAndDown Feature
           2B. MSUSpartan76 Feature
Part 3. Rose Bowl Discussion
           3A. Pre-Game Discusison
           3B. The Game/Results - Beyond the Rose Bowl Part 1
           3C. Beyond the Rose Bowl Part 2  (This Edition)

Panelists:

ATownAndDown (Follow A-Town on M-Live)

MSUSpartan76 (Follow '76 on M-Live)
SpartanMan82 (Check out all of SM82's posts)

Note: This will be the final weekly Front Burner edition. Others will follow as new developments related tot the football team dictate.

First let's take a look at the Rose Bowl and celebration highlights.



__________________________________________

1. MSU has finished as a finalist in high profile recruiting battles frequently in recent years. Should we expect to win those battles more regularly immediately, or will MSU need a validation season in 2014 before Dantonio lands more plan A recruits resulting in top 20 recruiting classes?

ATownAndDown (Follow A-Town on M-Live)
Recruiting is improving. There won't be a sudden jump if you ask me. Coach D has already said the pitch is going to remain the same and that is going to turn off some recruits. There are many recruits that view college football as a transitional league and want to hear what a program and coach are going to do for them to get them to the NFL. That is not what Coach D will ever push. He is going to tell guys how its going to be and what is expected of them at MSU. Some recruits will be smart enough to see the results of having that lunchbox mentality (Coach D has put 24 players in the NFL and with guys like Dennard, Bullough, Lewis, Allen, Fou, etc. that list will grow longer soon) but others want to hear the coach tell them that getting them ready for the NFL is his goal. But you are already seeing bigger recruits looking a little harder at MSU and some of the prognosticators are shifting their speculations toward MSU because of that.

MSUSpartan76 (Follow '76 on M-Live)
Elsworth was a walk-on. How many star players has MSU produced from the ranks of the recruiting site 2-stars and unrated?

What we should expect is the MSU Spartan Football coaching staff to continue to stuff the roster with kids that fit the program, can be developed, who are willing to put in the work, who play as a team, and who never quit. We need and want those players that fit: Spartans Will!

We do not need chUMps as role models. We do not need to polish recruiting trophies. Those so-called recruiting "battles" are just hype created by the recruiting sites and spoon fed to the fans. MSU needs no validation. The only true validation comes with "Just Win."

SpartanMan82 (Check out chUMp of the Month Winners)
The recruiting situation is already improving. Nothing is certain until LOIs are signed, but getting a verbal from the top player in Pennsylvania last month was a sign of things to come. There is only room for a few more players in the 2014 Class, but it looks like MSU is bidding for some big names to add before signing day in February.

Much has been made of how well Mark Dantonio has done with "lower-tier" recruits, but that success doesn't mean that he only wants 2-star players. He will be going after "higher-tier" recruits for the 2015 Class, and we should see results of those recruiting efforts during the next eight months. I expect next year's group to finish in the Top 20, perhaps Top 15 or better.

Meanwhile, the 2014 Class is ranked around #35 in the country right now, but every time Dantonio is asked about them, he says it's a great group. As long as Dantonio gets who he wants, it won't matter how many stars they have coming out of high school.

__________________________________________

2. What do you think will be the most intriguing stories in the off-season?

MSUSpartan76 (Follow '76 on M-Live)
Easy. How are the fans going to handle the coaching decisions related to Damion Terry and Connor Cook. Where will Tyler O'Conner fit into the scheme of things.

One other story: Will Desmond Howard actually get a clue?

SpartanMan82 (Check out This Date in chUMp History)

Damion Terry still seems to be a more talented quarterback than Connor Cook, yet Cook has two years experience ahead of him. Will Terry be given a fair chance at the job? If not, will he get to play in non-garbage-time situations? Tyler Hoover guarantees it.

What happens with Don Treadwell? If Narduzzi stays with us, will there be a place for Treadwell on the staff?

What will Mark Hollis do about the perceived "problem" with the student section in Spartan Stadium? Several simple answers are available, and Hollis is more than competent enough to choose one of the solutions to the "problem". Will he fix it?

How do the coaches divide playing time between Jeremy Langford and the other viable running back candidates on the team now and those who will be arriving later this year? Langford will be a Senior, and we don't want a repeat of the LeVeon Bell show from last year, with one running back monopolizing all of the carries for a full season.

ATownAndDown (Follow A-Town on M-Live)
Player development is what I am most intrigued with. Defense will have a ton of talent but there will be holes to fill. Guys like Harris, Davis, LT, Clemons, Bullough, Hicks, Robinson, Edmundson, Jones, Reschke, etc. are all going to be given their opportunities to step up. It will be exciting to see what they do with those opportunities. But even on the offensive side of the ball guys like Holmes, Troup, Madaris, Arnett, Chmura, and even Shelton have showed some flashes. Can any of them step up and rock the boat? Do the starters up their game because of that competition?

Other storylines to watch: Where does Terry shake out and does Coach D go live with the QB's again? Where do guys like Williams and Lyles end up? Does Fowler petition for a 6th year? Potential transfers?

__________________________________________

3. How many losses will be too many for David Brandon to keep the Hokester at the Helm in Ann Arbor? MythAgain plays Notre Dame, Ohio STATE and MSU away from the Pig House. Will Hoke win enough games in 2014 to keep his job?

SpartanMan82 (Check out chUMp Satire)

A five-loss season would be very hard for Hoke to survive, but get ready for his resurrection early in the year. Michigan could again be 6-1, if not 7-0, before the bottom falls out next season. He really needs 10 wins to settle down that fan-base, but he won't get that many.

My guess is that Michigan will finish 8-4 next year, with multiple camps operating behind the scenes regarding the coach situation. If he wins his bowl game, he stays. If he loses his bowl game, he's gone.

ATownAndDown (Follow A-Town on M-Live)
No clue about if or what it will take for Hoke to keep his job. I have been perplexed by that situation with how the U of M fan base revolted against RichRod who was trending back toward a successful program but they are much more patient with Hoke who was his most successful off what RichRod built and has regressed since then.

I think Dave Brandon needs to worry about his own job. Michigan fans are getting tired of a lot of the business decisions being made regarding the program. Ticket prices are going up again and the home schedule for U of M is App St., Miami (OH), Utah, Minn, PSU, Ind, and Maryland. Also in talking to a few Michigan Men, they are not happy about the App St game being scheduled. While they understand the business side of it (should be an easy win but it will still drum up publicity) the publicity will be negative and remind fans of a very dark day in U of M football. Factor in that he is paying his coaching staff an exorbitant amount of money for the results they are getting and he seems to be putting very little pressure on them to change things up. I have even heard rumors that U of M might struggle to clear 100K in the stands at a couple of those poor games early games. How long do the powers that be at U of M allow their crown jewel to not sparkle?

MSUSpartan76 (Follow '76 on M-Live)
Who cares? This question, like the team it references, is totally irrelevant.
   Ok, so I suppose I have to give some kind of answer. Here goes. If Coach Choke stops serving donuts and starts serving Dominos Pizza, David "Avoid the Noid" Brandon will keep him for decades.

MSU does not measure its success by whatever happens with the Ann Arbor Charm School football club. Let's leave that to the chUMps to fret over.

******

Administrator's Note:  A happy shout out and huge thank you to our Front-Burner Contributors for the 2013 season. You guys really did a great job and brought new readers to SpartanResource.com - Thank you!!!   - Return2Glory

Readers - Please let them know your thoughts about their contributions to Front-Burner by clicking the comment link below!

Tweet ****** Click on NO COMMENTS (or # comments) below to enter and view reader comments. ----- Remember to check Spartan Headline links, updated real time, at the bottom of the page (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.