21st CENTURY FOOTBALL RIVALRY: MSU vs UM

One reason this web site exists is to counter and dispel the popular mythology that the University of Michigan is "so much better than" Michigan State (in many things, not just major sports). As long as the Michigan Mainstream Media Machine insists on perpetuating pro-UM story-lines over pro-MSU story-lines and/or the TRUTH, we will present alternative viewpoints of reality. We will always be "fact-based" in our process.

The football series between MSU and UM is 

TIED DURING THIS CENTURY.

By beating Michigan in 2015, Michigan State Football has now pulled EVEN with UM since the turn of the new millennium. As you can see below, the series is tied, 8-8 beginning with the year 2000:

The football series between Michigan State and
Michigan is tied, 8-8, since the year 2000
(courtesy Wikipedia)

(We extended the definition of "century" to include the year 2000, even though some would claim that year belongs to the previous century. We refuse to "fudge the facts" just to make our side look a little better.)

We are also pleased to report that the MSU Football Team has out-scored the UM Football team in games played since the year 2000:

The overall football score this century is

MSU 378, UM 376

That's pretty close, right? So we don't need to have Spartan fans everywhere woofing it up on the Bluebloods, especially after they almost beat our team on the field last year. Let's keep it real, okay?

But we also don't need to take a lot of crap from fake-fans and bandwagon-jumpers, and especially, the sports media. We don't need to sit quietly while our team is pushed into the ditch, just because vested interests favor the rich kids in Ann Arbor. Yes, they have a lot of money, and yes, they spend it wildly to promote their interests, but NO, THEY ARE NOT SUPERIOR because of their wallets.

It shouldn't matter how much they spend to buy their coaching staff, nor how many planes they send up in the sky to write snarky messages, nor the size of their crampy stadium, nor the extent to which they will throw wheelbarrows full of cash into their "non-revenue sports". None of that makes them "better than" everybody else.

This is the essence of the primary message that Mark Dantonio has brought to the table in this public debate between public institutions. Enough with the "little brother" crap. Enough with looking down on the color green compared to the color blue. Let's keep it real, okay?

People can look at numbers in different ways. Most people who want to identify a trend-line in any aspect of life will take a snapshot of the present moment, then look backwards in time until they see a pattern emerging. The result is considered the "current trend".

Others, like Michigan Football fans, will establish their trend-line by starting at an arbitrary date two centuries earlier, then add-in whatever just happened in order to make only a microscopic revision to their "pattern". The UM "All-Time Wins Record" is a trick, designed to keep everything looking just the same as it did in 1935 or thereabouts, no matter what happens in the present-day reality.

The series is actually tied since 1998 (9-9). This is a much more relevant measurement than starting in the 1800s before rugby had developed into modern football, with forward passing and scoring systems that resemble what we see today.

So the new "water-mark" in the rivalry series, including the most recent game, shows that the game record between MSU and UM is TIED going back nearly two decades. Wolverine dominance was largely a feature of the 1970s-1980s, not including the pre-war era when all games were played in Ann Arbor. Let's keep it real, okay?

---------

Tweet ****** The purpose of this web site is to expose the mainstream media bias that consistently portrays Michigan in a favorable light under any and all circumstances. We present current facts and review historical records to show that UM is not all they are cracked up to be. This process involves information that is negative by nature, offered as a counter-balance to the biased picture we all see on a regular basis in the mainstream media. These negative facts may involve Wolverine teams, players, coaches, administrators, and/or fans. We are here to prove that Michigan is NOT AS DIFFERENT as they want us all to believe.

MICHIGAN'S KARMA PAYBACK

What is Karma?

A person's actions deciding their fate in the future. Cause and effect. A fate that ultimately balances success and failure.

UM's Karmic Debt

Even prior to the founding of the State Agricultural College of the State of Michigan, the UM arrogance was in full force. When the Michigan Legislature moved UM (then Catholepistemiad, a Jesuit college) to Ann Arbor in the year Michigan became a state, the Legislature gave UM a charter that included agriculture, forestry, animal husbandry, mechanics, and a host of other educational programs that would benefit the people of Michigan. UM ignored those common pursuits and, instead, robed itself in an arrogant, elitist attitude that it would be the "Harvard of the West." The reneging of the charter led to the founding of what is now Michigan State University. UM endeavored to keep MSU from being founded.

Ever since its founding in 1855, MSU has suffered the arrogance and nefarious actions by UM, including attempts to steal its Land Grant money, its forestry program, its engineering program, and repeated moves to keep MSU out of the B1G Ten Conference.

There is a lot more, but that will be an article for another day. This is about football.

Flashback to November 3, 2007, East Lansing. It's Coach Dantonio's first game versus UM. It's midway through the 4th period. Michigan State had rallied from a 0-14 halftime deficit to take a 24-14 lead. Chad Henne went down with a twisted ankle. Ryan Mallet came in, botched the snap which bounced once right into the hands of Mike Hart who eeked out an 18 yard 1st down.

Michigan came back to win 28-24. A lucky bounce put the ball into a Wolverine's hands. It could have gone differently, but it counts all the same.

On national TV, post game, Mark Hart (the beneficiary of the bounce) inferred that Michigan had just been playing with the Spartans like an older sibling might do.

“I thought it was funny. They got excited. It’s good. Sometimes you get your little brother excited when you’re playing basketball and you let him get the lead. Then you come back and take it from him.”

Watch Hart's shifty eyes. He knew at the time it was wrong, classless, unsportsmanlike, and arrogant.

• The school, the athletic department and the coaching staff all did and said nothing about it.
• Current and former players, some in the NFL, use it frequently with glee.
• The media embraced it.
• Going into the 2013 UM-MSU game, ABC announced the upcoming program as "Michigan versus Little Brother Michigan State."
• The expression popped up during the B1G Ten Championship game and again in the Rose Bowl by the commentators.

For 2911 days and counting, Spartans have daily suffered the Mike Hart Insult.

UM's Karmic Payback

• Coaching carousel.
• Lloyd Carr was ushered out.
• Rich Rodriguez was brought in and brought NCAA sanctions down on Michigan.
• Brady Hoke led the Ann Arbor squad to ever lower levels of success each year.
• During the first 6 years, UM scoring has dropped, reaching a 46 year low of 6 points in 2013.
• Lots of individual, team, and program records set -- all negative. -48 yards rushing is a UM school record.

2007: Coach Dantonio's response to Mike Hart's insult:

"It's not over. It'll never be over here. It's just starting."

Flash forward to October 17, 2015, Ann Arbor. It's Coach Harbaugh's first game versus MSU. There are 10 seconds on the clock. The score is 23-21. Michigan ball, 4th and 2 at the MSU 47. The punter fumbles the snap, gets it back and is hit. Jalen Watts-Jackson snags the airborne ball and rumbles 38 yards in for the score.

MSU came back to win 27-23. A lucky hit put the ball into a Spartan's hands. It could have gone differently, but it counts all the same. Jim Harbaugh, the "Messiah of Michigan Football," became the 7th UM coach (67 years) to lose his first game against MSU. Coach Dantonio went to 7-2 versus UM.

The day before the 2015 game, Mike Hart stated that making his comments was a mistake. Even with that, he tries to put the blame on MSU.

"There was something that week he had read several Michigan State players say — he can’t specifically recall what it was — but it stuck in his head."

Karma

2007 Michigan comeback win 28-24.

"Sometimes you get your little brother excited when you're playing basketball and you let him get the lead. Then you come back and take it from him."

2015 Michigan State comeback win 27-23.

"Sometimes you get your little brother excited when you're playing basketball and you let him get the lead. Then you come back and take it from him."

After the game, I copied a post written by a UM fan, "East Arbor," on the M-Live message boards (10/21/15).

"This is the Mike Hart curse at work. You would think that after years of annual bluster, unfounded arrogance, planting spikes, and repeated losses stretching over the better part of a decade, that the program and fan base would reflect on how foolish these sophomoric pregame antics are perceived by the prevailing opponent. But that's not likely to change - perhaps the theory is to keep it up and by the law of averages, at some point there will be a victory for the Champs of the World, at which point a decade's worth of blueballs bravado can finally be spurted into Sparty's face. But by that time, it will be nothing more than an aberration rather than some sort of kingly proclamation of elite status."

There are a few Wolverines that get it. Maybe when a tens of thousands get it Karma will get back in balance. Until then...

It's just starting.

----------

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.*****

MARK DANTONIO MOVES TO 9-0 "AGAINST THE SPREAD" VERSUS MICHIGAN

Michigan fans complain about Michigan State people "playing the disrespect card", as they call it, even as Blue Nation collectively projects its own Inferiority Complex onto the Spartans. What else but personal insecurity could explain all of the huffing-and-puffing, the chest-beating, the annually-resurrected crazy claims of superiority, and the deeply-held fascination with a bygone era in which, yes, they were generally the best team around. (Just that it was a RUGBY team, not a football team.)

So how do you measure respect? Many ways, but few more reliable than public opinion polls ("Top 25") and game-by-game predicted outcomes.

Along those lines, we've seen MSU actually drop-while-winning in the polls this season, several times already. Other teams can remain undefeated with choppy performances without suffering a drop in the polls. But when the Spartans "win ugly", down they go. UM fans actually credit the small drop in the polls for their team this week (three places) as a "sign of respect" for their own team. But if they had lost the same game in the same way to Rutgers, wouldn't they have dropped more than three notches? If so, doesn't that mean the respected-team in this equation wears green-and-white? That's another sign of underlying disrespect on their part. Further, MSU held-even in the polls even though they beat UM; how is that a "sign of respect" for the Wolverines?

Mark Dantonio beat the spread again last weekend, making him 9-0 against the Vegas Line in games versus Michigan*. That means he beats the spread every year, win or lose. That means his team regularly gets less respect than warranted, year after year after year. The punctuation mark this season was when Dantonio was asked during a live interview on CBS-Radio whether he wanted to see the University of Michigan Football team be successful. What other coach (in any sport) gets that question asked of them?

Some other trends that continued based on the outcome last weekend:

• MSU moves to 11-8 in games played against UM while any BULLOUGH was in the lineup for the Spartans.
• Every first-year Michigan Football Coach since 1948 has lost his first game against Michigan State.
• The series is TIED IN GAMES WON during this century.
• The series is WITHIN TWO POINTS SCORED in games played this century.
• MSU improves to 7-0 when both teams were ranked and playing in Ann Arbor
• Dantonio teams have outscored UM teams with three different head coaches by 96 points over nine games (248-152)

When will Jim Harbaugh get the question,

"Are you rooting for Michigan State?"

*This "fact" was mentioned in pre-game articles, but we have not yet been able to find verification of it because we can't find a web site that shows point-spreads from games that were played years ago. If anybody can help us find that data, please report in to us. Thanks.

---------

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.*****

COACHES COMMENTS REFLECT DIFFERENT CULTURES OF THEIR FOOTBALL PROGRAMS

Both coaches spoke after the game in the normal press conference setting. Their comments offer some insights into their programs, and highlight the differences between the team cultures of Michigan State and Michigan.

Jim Harbaugh was understandably sober, perhaps somber, as he stared blankly at the media audience. He spoke highly of his team, commended their efforts, but also made it clear it was their mistakes along with bad officiating that took the game out of their hands. He repeatedly emphasized that they were going to move on to the next game, take them one at a time, etc. And he said more than once that he would tell his players to get a "steely spine" of resolve from the experience.

Dantonio was calm, as always, commending his players and their effort, as well as thrice complimenting their opponent. He talked about how his team has a "belief system", and while it doesn't always result in wins, it holds them together. He said he was ready to praise his players for their work before the final play transpired. He was generally satisfied with how they had handled their end of things even in the face of defeat. He said the most important thing was to get the win and move to 7-0.

The "Harbaugh Syndrome" is all about an individual drive to win everything and anything that comes into target range as a goal. It's based on individuals pushing themselves to beat other individuals. This approach fits in well at Michigan.

The "Dantonio System" is based on all players bonding together in the belief that they can be successful by playing their roles well, regardless of star-player status. It's based on people working together to function as an integrated whole that is greater than the sum of it's parts.  This approach fits in well at Michigan State.

Players being recruited for college look into both programs to see if they can find what they are looking for. Those who select Michigan State will do so because they like what they see, especially in contrast with what they see in other places. While some great players will likely choose the program that Harbaugh offers, we can remember that they probably wouldn't have fit into the grooves of Spartanism anyway.

The game as a whole, including the post-game comments

from Michigan State Coach Mark Dantonio, will probably

serve to hold steady or advance current recruiting efforts

for players in the 2016 Class and beyond.

---------

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.*****

SPARTANS VERSUS WOLVERINES: PRE-GAME ASSESSMENT by MSUSpartan76

Can the Spartans beat the Wolverines?

If anyone knows anything about college football it is that any given team on any given field on any given day can beat any other team. There are three story lines to watch in this game.

No. 1. Special teams. In the past six games it has been green Kryptonite for the Spartans. 60 miles to the south, special teams, while not special, have done more than an adequate job. While the missed FGs are unscored points, and the KO return melt-downs are bad, the real story will be field position. If Jake Hartbarger is 100%, the field position edge goes to MSU. HIs leg makes up for a lot of punt return yardage. If Delton Williams is 100% and put on the returns, that, too, could be more than just an equalizer.

Advantage: UM

No. 2. UoM offense versus MSU defense. Coach Harbaugh has put in place a power-run system where multiple RB/TE combinations get into the mix. This creates strength at the point of attack and, so far, has been successful. It is similar to the wishbone (more than the counter trey) in that regard, but the idea of adding strength at the point of attack is not new. The Spartan LBs will watch the film. They will know their assignments. The fun part will be seeing which side executes and if Jake Rudock is forced to throw more often than he should. On the other hand, it is possible that Coach Harbaugh decides to test the "walking wounded" secondary MSU will put on the field. UM has a good receiver or two and if Jake Rudock can put the ball out those kids can catch it. While Coach Harbaugh might want to test the Spartan secondary, he does so by putting his snap caller at risk. Those Spartan Dawgs will get him more than once.

Edge: MSU

No. 3. MSU offense versus UoM "elite" defense. Elite - that's my old lady's corset cover. No! Good, yes. This should be as clear as a button hook in the well water; UM defense has done the job. Versus lesser competition? Yes. Versus mediocre offenses? Yes. Now they will get a chance to test their mettle against a worthy opponent. MSU O-line has not been creating vacuous gaps on every snap. The RB up the middle is not good for three yards and a cloud of dust. There have been some big plays, sure. But the grind it up the middle approach has not worked well. UM has stopped the run versus their slate of opponents. So the middle is a UM lock. The edges? That will be fun to watch. Then there is the passing attack. Cook will steadily get chunks of yards through the air, but without the running attack, UM will have to adjust and it will become a contest of wills.

Edge: Even

By the way, if history tells us anything, there is no such thing as a home field advantage in this rivalry. What should the real point spread be? Ignore Vegas. Trust me. Going into this game, the records, the rankings, everything goes out the window. On any given day......

The real point spread in this game is zero.

---------

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 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.*****