Having read the recent article, HERE'S PROOF THAT UM "RAN UP THE SCORE" AGAINST MSU IN 2002 FOOTBALL GAME, it seemed that a lot was left out.
Those chUMps are whining about a single TD. Yet those obsessive historians ignore their sordid past.
Let's take a look. Just a sample, mind you, otherwise it would have to become a serial post.
The largest margin of victory of the Spartans over UolM was in 1967, a 34-0 shutout. Using 34 points as the marker, UolM has exceeded that margin of victory over the Spartans 12 times.
10/12/1898: 39-0
10/8/1902: 119-0
10/12/1907: 46-0
10/12/1912: 55-7
11/4/1922: 63-0
10/3/1925: 39-0
10/9/1926: 55-3
9/29/1945: 40-0
11/9/1946: 55-7
9/27/1947: 55-0
10/8/1983: 42-0
11/2/2002: 49-3
With the exception of the 1983 game, all of those were played in AA.
In 1902, MSU (Michigan Agricultural College) had a total enrollment of 689 students, which included 158 women. In 1902, UolM had a total enrollment of 3792 students. No gender deliniation provided in the records.
Compare this to 2007, when UolM had 41,042 students versus Appalachian State with 13,997 students. That was a D-IA versus D-IAA with a student body ratio of greater than 3:1. In 1902, the student body ratio was about 5:1, which makes it more of a D-I versus D-III match.
So, go back to the 1902 score and decide whether or not UolM ran up the score. One other datum to consider when viewing that score - UolM was recruiting, MAC was not. UolM was the equivalent of a semi-pro team and MAC was barely out of the club sport category.
Fast forward to 1937, when NCAA reclassified MSC as a Major football program. MSC had a total enrollment of 1203 students, which included 503 women. UolM had a total enrollment of 11,777 students, which included 3514 women. That is almost a 10:1 ratio (> 11:1 male students).
Scrolling forward, MSU enrollment had achieved parity with UolM prior to the 1978 NCAA split of Division I into I-A and I-AA.
1945: UolM 15,437 MSC 4,308
1954: UolM 30,570 MSU 16,234
1964: UolM 37,945 MSU 31,268
1974: UolM 42,495 MSU 43,459
1984: UolM 34,347 MSU 40,272
1994: UolM 36,408 MSU 40,254
2004: UolM 39,533 MSU 44,836
2014: UolM 41,924 MSU 50,085
(Main campus enrollment only, Fall enrollment)
Of the 12 games played where UolM ran up the score, 10 of them happened when they were beating up on a team from a much smaller school. They did this all the time.
Year Record PF-PA
1901 11-0-0 550-0
1902 11-0-0 664-12
1903 11-0-1 565-6
1904 10-0-0 567-22
1905 12-1-0 495-2
Who did they play?
1901
Albion (MI) in AA
Case Institute of Technology (OH) in AA
Indiana in AA
Northwestern (IL) in AA
Buffalo (NY) in AA
Carlisle Indian School (PA) in Detroit
Ohio St. in Columbus
Chicago (IL) in AA
Beloit (WI) in AA
Iowa in Chicago
Stanford (CA) in Pasadena
1902
Albion (MI) in AA
Case Institute of Technology (OH) in AA
Michigan St. in AA
Indiana in AA
Notre Dame (IN) in Toledo
Ohio St. in AA
Wisconsin in Chicago
Iowa in AA
Chicago (IL) in Chicago
Oberlin (OH) in AA
Minnesota in AA
1903
Case Institute of Technology (OH) in AA
Albion (MI) in AA
Beloit (WI) in AA
Ohio Northern in AA
Indiana in AA
Ferris St. (MI) in AA
Drake (IA) in AA
Minnesota in Minneapolis
Ohio St. in AA
Wisconsin in AA
Oberlin (OH) in AA
Chicago (IL) in Chicago
1904
Case Institute of Technology (OH) in AA
Ohio Northern in AA
Kalamazoo (MI) in AA
Physicians & Surgeons (IL) in AA
Ohio St. in Columbus
American Medical (IL) in AA
West Virginia in AA
Wisconsin in Madison
Drake (IA) in AA
Chicago (IL) in AA
1905
Ohio Wesleyan in AA
Kalamazoo (MI) in AA
Case Institute of Technology (OH) in AA
Ohio Northern in AA
Vanderbilt (TN) in AA
Nebraska in AA
Albion (MI) in AA
Drake (IA) in AA
Illinois in Champaign
Ohio St. in AA
Wisconsin in AA
Oberlin (OH) in AA
Chicago (IL) in Chicago
45 home games, 4 neutral sites, 8 away games
Homefield advantage was very real in those days. Keep in mind, the Model T production started in 1908. The Wright Brothers went to Kitty Hawk in 1903. The first practical airplane was flown in 1909. The modern toilet was designed in 1906. A team typically travelled by train, arriving in time to walk to the stadium carrying their gear just in time for the game. Trains of that age typically ran at 20-30 mph, so a team would have to leave several hours to arrive in time, sometimes travelling overnight and sleeping on the train. Food service on trains was non-existent.
(We won't even get into whether the thugs recruited by UolM actually enrolled.) FYI, in 1906, UolM was censored by the Western Conference (aka Big Ten) for failure to comply with conference recruiting regulations.and members were not allowed to schedule games. UolM left the conference in 1907 and was readmitted after 10 seasons.
So 80% of those games were at home and more than half were versus non-peer opponents. Go back and look at the scores. Did UolM run up the scores on any of those teams?
Perhaps a second look at the recent MSU TD will be seen in a slightly different light.
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.*****
Showing posts with label win loss records. Show all posts
Showing posts with label win loss records. Show all posts
Monday, October 27, 2014
Monday, October 13, 2014
The Path Is Clear For A Spartan National Football Title
Yet another week of upheavals in the college football rankings just completed. What does all this mean for the Michigan State Spartans? Let's start by looking at what the oddsmakers in Vegas think.
College Football Future Odds (Vegas Insider):
Michigan State 13/2
Florida State 7/1
Mississippi State 7/1
Alabama 8/1
Oklahoma 9/1
Notre Dame 10/1
Ohio State 10/1
Mississippi 10/1
Auburn 12/1
Oregon 12/1
Georgia 14/1
Baylor 15/1
Texas Christian 50/1
Associated Press Top 25
1. Mississippi State
2. Florida State
3. Mississippi
4. Baylor
5. Notre Dame
6. Auburn
7. Alabama
8. Michigan State
9. Oregon
10. Georgia
11. Oklahoma
12. Texas Christian
13. Ohio State
Coaches Poll
1. Mississippi State
2. Florida State
3. Mississippi
4. Baylor
5. Notre Dame
6. Michigan State
7. Alabama
8. Auburn
9. Oregon
10. Georgia
11. Oklahoma
12. Texas Christian
13. Ohio State
CBSSports.com 128
1. Mississippi State
2. Mississippi
3. Florida State
4. Baylor
5. Notre Dame
6. Auburn
7. Alabama
8. Oregon
9. Michigan State
10. Georgia
11. Texas Christian
12. Oklahoma
13. Ohio State
ESPN Power Rankings
1. Mississippi State
2. Mississippi
3. Florida State
4. Baylor
5. Notre Dame
6. Auburn
7. Georgia
8. Michigan State
9. Alabama
10. Oregon
11. Oklahoma
12. Texas Christian
13. Ohio State
The data for each team is shown. Certainly the selection committee will be looking at this information, but probably a lot more.
In AP Ranking order:
#1 Mississippi State (SEC) 6-0/3-0, Top-25 3-0
Opp W-L: 23-13 pts/gm 41.8-20.0 (21.8 MoV)
Pre-season AP-NR; 2013: 7-6 AP-NR
#2 Florida State (ACC) 6-0/4-0, Top-25 1-0
Opp W-L: 19-19 pts/gm 39.0-20.7 (18.3 MoV)
Pre-season AP-1; 2013: 14-0 AP-1
#3 Mississippi (SEC) 6-0/3-0, Top-25 2-0
Opp W-L: 21-16 pts/gm 35.7-11.8 (23.9 MoV)
Pre-season AP-NR; 2013: 8-5 AP-NR
#4 Baylor (Big 12) 6-0/3-0, Top-25 1-0
Opp W-L: 14-21 pts/gm 52.7-20.0 (32.7 MoV)
Pre-season AP-10; 2013: 11-2 AP-13
#5 Notre Dame (Ind/Acc) 6-0/2-0, Top-25 1-0
Opp W-L: 19-21 pts/gm 34.5-17.2 (17.3 MoV)
Pre-season AP-17; 2013: 9-4 AP-20
#6 Auburn (SEC) 5-1/2-1, Top-25 2-1
Opp W-L: 23-12 pts/gm 38.8-18.3 (20.5 MoV)
Pre-season AP-6; 2013: 12-2 AP-2
#7 Alabama (SEC) 5-1/2-1, Top-25 0-1
Opp W-L: 20-15 pts/gm 33.2-15.3 (27.9 MoV)
Pre-season AP-2; 2013: 11-2 AP-7
#8 Michigan State (B1G Ten) 5-1/2-0, Top-25 1-1
Opp W-L: 23-14 pts/gm 45.5-22.3 (23.2 MoV)
Pre-season AP-8; 2013: 13-1, AP-3
#9 Oregon (Pac-12) 5-1/2-1, Top-25 2-0
Opp W-L: 21-16 pts/gm 43.3-24.3 (19.0 MoV)
Pre-season AP-3; 2013: 11-2 AP-9
#10 Georgia (SEC) 5-1/3-1, Top-25 2-1
Opp W-L: 17-20 pts/gm 43.2-18.0 (25.2 MoV)
Pre-season AP-12; 2013: 8-5 AP-NR
#11 Oklahoma (Big 12) 5-1/2-1, Top-25 0-1
Opp W-L: 17-18 pts/gm 40.5-21.5 (19.0 MoV)
Pre-season AP-4; 2013: 11-2 AP-6
Texas Christian (Big 12) 4-1/1-1, Top-25 1-1
Opp W-L: 19-9 pts/gm 45.8-23.0 (22.8 MoV)
Pre-season AP-NR; 2013: 4-8 AP-NR
Ohio State (B1G Ten) 4-1/1-0, Top-25 0-0
Opp W-L: 13-17 pts/gm 44.6-20.8 (23.8 MoV)
Pre-season AP-5; 2013: 12-2 AP-12
The critical upcoming games for each team make any kind of prediction irrelevant at this time. However, some things can be seen more clearly from the schedules.
Assuming Michigan State wins out, all 5 of the following games will bring the Spartans up in the rankings.
#1 Mississippi State @ #7 Alabama
#1 Mississippi State @ #3 Mississippi
#2 Florida State vs #5 Notre Dame
#3 Mississippi vs #6 Auburn
#6 Auburn @ #7 Alabama
There are 15 other games that likely will impact who goes to the post season title matches.
#4 Baylor @ #11 Oklahoma
#4 Baylor vs #15 Oklahoma State
#4 Baylor vs #14 Kansas State
#5 Notre Dame @ #17 Arizona State
#5 Notre Dame @ #22 Southern California
#6 Auburn @ #10 Georgia
#6 Auburn VS #21 Texas A&M
#7 Alabama #21 Texas A&M
#8 Michigan State vs #13 Ohio State
#9 Oregon @ #20 Utah
#9 Oregon vs #23 Stanford
#11 Oklahoma vs #14 Kansas State
#11 Oklahoma VS #15 Oklahoma State
#12 Texas Christian vs #14 Kansas State
#12 Texas Christian vs #15 Oklahoma State
Mississippi State, Mississippi, and Georgia are the "Cinderella stories" thus far this season. All three came out of nowhere and onto the big stage. So the question about them is, can they keep it up? Do they know how to win while dealing with the media spotlight?
All MSU has to do is what Coach Dantonio said. Just win. Over the next few weeks, 4-6 of the 7 teams ahead of MSU in the polls will take a loss.
JUST WIN!
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.*****
College Football Future Odds (Vegas Insider):
Michigan State 13/2
Florida State 7/1
Mississippi State 7/1
Alabama 8/1
Oklahoma 9/1
Notre Dame 10/1
Ohio State 10/1
Mississippi 10/1
Auburn 12/1
Oregon 12/1
Georgia 14/1
Baylor 15/1
Texas Christian 50/1
Take a second look. The Spartans are currently the odds-on favorite to win it!?
There is a baker's dozen of teams listed. It started with all teams better than 20-to-1 on the Vegas odds list. Looking at the polls resulted in TCU becaming the 13th contender.Associated Press Top 25
1. Mississippi State
2. Florida State
3. Mississippi
4. Baylor
5. Notre Dame
6. Auburn
7. Alabama
8. Michigan State
9. Oregon
10. Georgia
11. Oklahoma
12. Texas Christian
13. Ohio State
Coaches Poll
1. Mississippi State
2. Florida State
3. Mississippi
4. Baylor
5. Notre Dame
6. Michigan State
7. Alabama
8. Auburn
9. Oregon
10. Georgia
11. Oklahoma
12. Texas Christian
13. Ohio State
CBSSports.com 128
1. Mississippi State
2. Mississippi
3. Florida State
4. Baylor
5. Notre Dame
6. Auburn
7. Alabama
8. Oregon
9. Michigan State
10. Georgia
11. Texas Christian
12. Oklahoma
13. Ohio State
ESPN Power Rankings
1. Mississippi State
2. Mississippi
3. Florida State
4. Baylor
5. Notre Dame
6. Auburn
7. Georgia
8. Michigan State
9. Alabama
10. Oregon
11. Oklahoma
12. Texas Christian
13. Ohio State
The data for each team is shown. Certainly the selection committee will be looking at this information, but probably a lot more.
In AP Ranking order:
#1 Mississippi State (SEC) 6-0/3-0, Top-25 3-0
Opp W-L: 23-13 pts/gm 41.8-20.0 (21.8 MoV)
Pre-season AP-NR; 2013: 7-6 AP-NR
#2 Florida State (ACC) 6-0/4-0, Top-25 1-0
Opp W-L: 19-19 pts/gm 39.0-20.7 (18.3 MoV)
Pre-season AP-1; 2013: 14-0 AP-1
#3 Mississippi (SEC) 6-0/3-0, Top-25 2-0
Opp W-L: 21-16 pts/gm 35.7-11.8 (23.9 MoV)
Pre-season AP-NR; 2013: 8-5 AP-NR
#4 Baylor (Big 12) 6-0/3-0, Top-25 1-0
Opp W-L: 14-21 pts/gm 52.7-20.0 (32.7 MoV)
Pre-season AP-10; 2013: 11-2 AP-13
#5 Notre Dame (Ind/Acc) 6-0/2-0, Top-25 1-0
Opp W-L: 19-21 pts/gm 34.5-17.2 (17.3 MoV)
Pre-season AP-17; 2013: 9-4 AP-20
#6 Auburn (SEC) 5-1/2-1, Top-25 2-1
Opp W-L: 23-12 pts/gm 38.8-18.3 (20.5 MoV)
Pre-season AP-6; 2013: 12-2 AP-2
#7 Alabama (SEC) 5-1/2-1, Top-25 0-1
Opp W-L: 20-15 pts/gm 33.2-15.3 (27.9 MoV)
Pre-season AP-2; 2013: 11-2 AP-7
#8 Michigan State (B1G Ten) 5-1/2-0, Top-25 1-1
Opp W-L: 23-14 pts/gm 45.5-22.3 (23.2 MoV)
Pre-season AP-8; 2013: 13-1, AP-3
#9 Oregon (Pac-12) 5-1/2-1, Top-25 2-0
Opp W-L: 21-16 pts/gm 43.3-24.3 (19.0 MoV)
Pre-season AP-3; 2013: 11-2 AP-9
#10 Georgia (SEC) 5-1/3-1, Top-25 2-1
Opp W-L: 17-20 pts/gm 43.2-18.0 (25.2 MoV)
Pre-season AP-12; 2013: 8-5 AP-NR
#11 Oklahoma (Big 12) 5-1/2-1, Top-25 0-1
Opp W-L: 17-18 pts/gm 40.5-21.5 (19.0 MoV)
Pre-season AP-4; 2013: 11-2 AP-6
Texas Christian (Big 12) 4-1/1-1, Top-25 1-1
Opp W-L: 19-9 pts/gm 45.8-23.0 (22.8 MoV)
Pre-season AP-NR; 2013: 4-8 AP-NR
Ohio State (B1G Ten) 4-1/1-0, Top-25 0-0
Opp W-L: 13-17 pts/gm 44.6-20.8 (23.8 MoV)
Pre-season AP-5; 2013: 12-2 AP-12
The critical upcoming games for each team make any kind of prediction irrelevant at this time. However, some things can be seen more clearly from the schedules.
Assuming Michigan State wins out, all 5 of the following games will bring the Spartans up in the rankings.
#1 Mississippi State @ #7 Alabama
#1 Mississippi State @ #3 Mississippi
#2 Florida State vs #5 Notre Dame
#3 Mississippi vs #6 Auburn
#6 Auburn @ #7 Alabama
There are 15 other games that likely will impact who goes to the post season title matches.
#4 Baylor @ #11 Oklahoma
#4 Baylor vs #15 Oklahoma State
#4 Baylor vs #14 Kansas State
#5 Notre Dame @ #17 Arizona State
#5 Notre Dame @ #22 Southern California
#6 Auburn @ #10 Georgia
#6 Auburn VS #21 Texas A&M
#7 Alabama #21 Texas A&M
#8 Michigan State vs #13 Ohio State
#9 Oregon @ #20 Utah
#9 Oregon vs #23 Stanford
#11 Oklahoma vs #14 Kansas State
#11 Oklahoma VS #15 Oklahoma State
#12 Texas Christian vs #14 Kansas State
#12 Texas Christian vs #15 Oklahoma State
Mississippi State, Mississippi, and Georgia are the "Cinderella stories" thus far this season. All three came out of nowhere and onto the big stage. So the question about them is, can they keep it up? Do they know how to win while dealing with the media spotlight?
All MSU has to do is what Coach Dantonio said. Just win. Over the next few weeks, 4-6 of the 7 teams ahead of MSU in the polls will take a loss.
The Spartans control their own destiny in this.
JUST WIN!
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.*****
Wednesday, November 6, 2013
Cupcakes and other Urban Legends
We Spartan fans have heard it over and over again and from all quarters. The chUMps and fans of other B1G Ten schools have chewed and spit this at us. The written and broadcast media have taken up the chorus.
Michigan State has a cupcake schedule. No Ohio St. No Wisconsin. No Penn St. And they play FCS Youngstown State! Cupcake schedule.
MSU's schedule is tailor-made for a run at the championship.
The Spartans have played NO ONE.
The defensive is over rated and the stats are inflated from not having played a quality opponent all season.
The offense is pathetic and is only doing as well as it is because MSU has not played a quality opponent all season.
Let's take this one from the top.
B1G Ten Standings
LEADERS DIVISION
Ohio St. 9-0/5-0
Wisconsin 6-2/4-1
Penn St. 5-3/2-2
Indiana 3-5/1-3
Illinois 3-5/0-4
Purdue 1-7/0-4
LEGENDS DIVISION
Michigan St. 8-1/5-0
Nebraska 6-2/3-1
Minnesota 7-2/3-2
Michigan 6-2/2-2
Iowa 5-4/2-3
Northwestern 4-5/0-5
The obvious B1G Ten Championship Game contenders are Ohio St. and Wisconsin and Michigan St. and Nebraska. With 3 or 4 conference games left to go, there is a good chance 2 of those teams will meet up for the title bout. Therefore this analysis will focus just on those 4.
Just the facts.
Looking at the bottom half of both division, it is obvious that the Legends Division is the more competitive division, ergo the more difficult.
- OSU does not meet Michigan St. or Nebraska. It gets Iowa, Northwestern, and as a consolation prize, Michigan. By the way, that is the bottom half of the Legends Division.
- Wisconsin does not meet Michigan St. or Nebraska. It does get Iowa, Northwestern, and Minnesota. Minnesota and Michigan may be on par or Minnesota might make the schedule harder for the Badgers. The jury is still out on that point. Otherwise, it is the bottom half of the Legends Division.
- MSU does not meet Ohio St., Wisconsin, or Penn St. in the regular season having been schedule to play what is not the bottom half of the Leaders Division in cross divisional play. MSU did indeed play Youngstown State.
- Nebraska does not meet Ohio St. or Wisconsin. It does get Penn St. along with Illinois and Purdue. Is Penn St. better than Indiana? The record seems to indicate it is.
- Both OSU and UW play the same B1G Ten bottom feeders that MSU was scheduled to play. Illinois, Indiana, and Purdue. Nebraska got dealt Penn St. instead of Indiana.
- In case you did not pick it up, neither of the Leaders contenders plays either of the Legends contenders. Reverse is true, too. Legends contenders to not play the Leaders contenders.
- The MSU, OSU, and UW conference schedules are equal. Nebraska has the tougher road, by a little.
Points go to Nebraska for the more difficult crossover schedule.
FCS Opponents.
The chUMps keep ragging that the Spartans played an FCS opponent. All this noise is a feeble attempt to detract from UM playing TWO MAC teams plus UCONN. We will take the high road and not mention that UM barely squeaked by 2 of those robust opponents. Instead, we will delve into the FCS opponents.
Question: How many of the 4 B1G Ten contenders played an FCS opponent?
Answer: All 4.
- Wisconsin beat Tennessee Tech. The Golden Eagles are 3-7.
- Ohio St. beat Florida A&M. The Rattlers are 3-6.
- Nebraska beat South Dakota St. The Jackrabbits are 5-4.
- MSU beat Youngstown St. The Penguins are 8-1.
How do these teams compare?
Total Offense
Youngstown St. (FCS25) 440.7 yd/gm
South Dakota St. (FCS60) 378.2 yd/gm
Tennessee Tech (FCS110) 296.9 yd/gm
Florida A&M (FCS121) 222.6 yd/gm
Rushing Offense
Youngstown St. (FCS20) 224.7 yd/gm
South Dakota St. (FCS82) 144.0 yd/gm
Tennessee Tech (FCS96) 127.5 yd/gm
Florida A&M (FCS103) 114.4 yd/gm
Passing Offense
South Dakota St. (FCS43) 234.2 yd/gm
Youngstown St. (FCS58) 216.0 yd/gm
Tennessee Tech (FCS95) 169.4 yd/gm
Florida A&M (FCS119) 108.1 yd/gm
Scoring Offense
Youngstown St. (FCS10) 39.4 pt/gm
South Dakota St. (FCS47) 29.3 pt/gm
Tennessee Tech (FCS80) 23.8 pt/gm
Florida A&M (FCS114) 15.7 pt/gm
Total Defense
Florida A&M (FCS17) 326.8 yd/gm
Youngstown St. (FCS73) 397.3 yd/gm
South Dakota St. (FCS86) 420.8 yd/gm
Tennessee Tech (FCS90) 426.5 yd/gm
Rushing Defense
Youngstown St. (FCS30) 133.2 yd/gm
Tennessee Tech (FCS65) 175.0 yd/gm
South Dakota St. (FCS79) 188.7 yd/gm
Florida A&M (FCS99) 214.1 yd/gm
Passing Defense
Florida A&M (FCS#1) 112.7 yd/gm
South Dakota St. (FCS77) 232.1 yd/gm
Tennessee Tech (FCS97) 251.5 yd/gm
Youngstown St. (FCS106) 264.1 yd/gm
Scoring Defense
Youngstown St. (FCS43) 23.9 pt/gm
Florida A&M (FCS62) 26.1 pt/gm
South Dakota St. (FCS73) 28.6 pt/gm
Tennessee Tech (FCS97) 33.7 pt/gm
Points go the Spartans for playing the (obviously) best of the 4 FCS opponents.
What about Strength of Schedule? How about just aggregate opponents' win-loss percentages.
Games played to date:
- Michigan St. opponents are 36-40 (0.4737)
- Ohio St. opponents are 35-41 (0.4605)
- Wisconsin opponents are 32-38 (0.4571)
- Nebraska opponents are 30-37 (0.4478)
Points go to the Spartans for playing the (obviously) best schedule of opponents to date.
Unplayed games:
- Nebraska faces 4 teams with a combined 24-10 record (0.7059).
- Michigan St. faces 3 teams with a combined 17-9 record (0.6538).
- Wisconsin faces 4 teams with a combined 21-12 record (0.6364).
- Ohio St. faces 3 teams with a combined 12-12 record (0.5000).
Nebraska clearly has the bumpiest road to Indianapolis.
Finally, the aggregate season records of all opponents is (subject to change as the games are played):
- Nebraska 54-47 (0.5347)
- Michigan St. 53-49 (0.5196)
- Wisconsin 53-50 (0.5146)
- Ohio St. 47-53 (0.4700)
So, the next time some dUMb chUMp starts wagging his tongue about the Spartan's cupcake schedule and what an easy road they have to Indianapolis, just look at him and say:
"Easy? Not much easier than Nebraska and certainly not nearly as easy as Ohio St. (or Wisconsin)."
And for the chUMps, you are not in this conversation because:
6-29
And that obviously means the Spartans have yet to face a quality opponent.
(with apologies to the other teams on the schedule)
Tweet ------------- Remember to check Spartan Headline links, updated real time, at the bottom of the page (Web version only). -------------- Please click on COMMENTS below the post to enter and view reader comments. ***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.blogspot.com/ (Web version only)
Michigan State has a cupcake schedule. No Ohio St. No Wisconsin. No Penn St. And they play FCS Youngstown State! Cupcake schedule.
MSU's schedule is tailor-made for a run at the championship.
The Spartans have played NO ONE.
The defensive is over rated and the stats are inflated from not having played a quality opponent all season.
The offense is pathetic and is only doing as well as it is because MSU has not played a quality opponent all season.
Let's take this one from the top.
B1G Ten Standings
LEADERS DIVISION
Ohio St. 9-0/5-0
Wisconsin 6-2/4-1
Penn St. 5-3/2-2
Indiana 3-5/1-3
Illinois 3-5/0-4
Purdue 1-7/0-4
LEGENDS DIVISION
Michigan St. 8-1/5-0
Nebraska 6-2/3-1
Minnesota 7-2/3-2
Michigan 6-2/2-2
Iowa 5-4/2-3
Northwestern 4-5/0-5
The obvious B1G Ten Championship Game contenders are Ohio St. and Wisconsin and Michigan St. and Nebraska. With 3 or 4 conference games left to go, there is a good chance 2 of those teams will meet up for the title bout. Therefore this analysis will focus just on those 4.
Just the facts.
Looking at the bottom half of both division, it is obvious that the Legends Division is the more competitive division, ergo the more difficult.
- OSU does not meet Michigan St. or Nebraska. It gets Iowa, Northwestern, and as a consolation prize, Michigan. By the way, that is the bottom half of the Legends Division.
- Wisconsin does not meet Michigan St. or Nebraska. It does get Iowa, Northwestern, and Minnesota. Minnesota and Michigan may be on par or Minnesota might make the schedule harder for the Badgers. The jury is still out on that point. Otherwise, it is the bottom half of the Legends Division.
- MSU does not meet Ohio St., Wisconsin, or Penn St. in the regular season having been schedule to play what is not the bottom half of the Leaders Division in cross divisional play. MSU did indeed play Youngstown State.
- Nebraska does not meet Ohio St. or Wisconsin. It does get Penn St. along with Illinois and Purdue. Is Penn St. better than Indiana? The record seems to indicate it is.
- Both OSU and UW play the same B1G Ten bottom feeders that MSU was scheduled to play. Illinois, Indiana, and Purdue. Nebraska got dealt Penn St. instead of Indiana.
- In case you did not pick it up, neither of the Leaders contenders plays either of the Legends contenders. Reverse is true, too. Legends contenders to not play the Leaders contenders.
- The MSU, OSU, and UW conference schedules are equal. Nebraska has the tougher road, by a little.
Points go to Nebraska for the more difficult crossover schedule.
FCS Opponents.
The chUMps keep ragging that the Spartans played an FCS opponent. All this noise is a feeble attempt to detract from UM playing TWO MAC teams plus UCONN. We will take the high road and not mention that UM barely squeaked by 2 of those robust opponents. Instead, we will delve into the FCS opponents.
Question: How many of the 4 B1G Ten contenders played an FCS opponent?
Answer: All 4.
- Wisconsin beat Tennessee Tech. The Golden Eagles are 3-7.
- Ohio St. beat Florida A&M. The Rattlers are 3-6.
- Nebraska beat South Dakota St. The Jackrabbits are 5-4.
- MSU beat Youngstown St. The Penguins are 8-1.
How do these teams compare?
Total Offense
Youngstown St. (FCS25) 440.7 yd/gm
South Dakota St. (FCS60) 378.2 yd/gm
Tennessee Tech (FCS110) 296.9 yd/gm
Florida A&M (FCS121) 222.6 yd/gm
Rushing Offense
Youngstown St. (FCS20) 224.7 yd/gm
South Dakota St. (FCS82) 144.0 yd/gm
Tennessee Tech (FCS96) 127.5 yd/gm
Florida A&M (FCS103) 114.4 yd/gm
Passing Offense
South Dakota St. (FCS43) 234.2 yd/gm
Youngstown St. (FCS58) 216.0 yd/gm
Tennessee Tech (FCS95) 169.4 yd/gm
Florida A&M (FCS119) 108.1 yd/gm
Scoring Offense
Youngstown St. (FCS10) 39.4 pt/gm
South Dakota St. (FCS47) 29.3 pt/gm
Tennessee Tech (FCS80) 23.8 pt/gm
Florida A&M (FCS114) 15.7 pt/gm
Total Defense
Florida A&M (FCS17) 326.8 yd/gm
Youngstown St. (FCS73) 397.3 yd/gm
South Dakota St. (FCS86) 420.8 yd/gm
Tennessee Tech (FCS90) 426.5 yd/gm
Rushing Defense
Youngstown St. (FCS30) 133.2 yd/gm
Tennessee Tech (FCS65) 175.0 yd/gm
South Dakota St. (FCS79) 188.7 yd/gm
Florida A&M (FCS99) 214.1 yd/gm
Passing Defense
Florida A&M (FCS#1) 112.7 yd/gm
South Dakota St. (FCS77) 232.1 yd/gm
Tennessee Tech (FCS97) 251.5 yd/gm
Youngstown St. (FCS106) 264.1 yd/gm
Scoring Defense
Youngstown St. (FCS43) 23.9 pt/gm
Florida A&M (FCS62) 26.1 pt/gm
South Dakota St. (FCS73) 28.6 pt/gm
Tennessee Tech (FCS97) 33.7 pt/gm
Points go the Spartans for playing the (obviously) best of the 4 FCS opponents.
What about Strength of Schedule? How about just aggregate opponents' win-loss percentages.
Games played to date:
- Michigan St. opponents are 36-40 (0.4737)
- Ohio St. opponents are 35-41 (0.4605)
- Wisconsin opponents are 32-38 (0.4571)
- Nebraska opponents are 30-37 (0.4478)
Points go to the Spartans for playing the (obviously) best schedule of opponents to date.
Unplayed games:
- Nebraska faces 4 teams with a combined 24-10 record (0.7059).
- Michigan St. faces 3 teams with a combined 17-9 record (0.6538).
- Wisconsin faces 4 teams with a combined 21-12 record (0.6364).
- Ohio St. faces 3 teams with a combined 12-12 record (0.5000).
Nebraska clearly has the bumpiest road to Indianapolis.
Finally, the aggregate season records of all opponents is (subject to change as the games are played):
- Nebraska 54-47 (0.5347)
- Michigan St. 53-49 (0.5196)
- Wisconsin 53-50 (0.5146)
- Ohio St. 47-53 (0.4700)
So, the next time some dUMb chUMp starts wagging his tongue about the Spartan's cupcake schedule and what an easy road they have to Indianapolis, just look at him and say:
"Easy? Not much easier than Nebraska and certainly not nearly as easy as Ohio St. (or Wisconsin)."
And for the chUMps, you are not in this conversation because:
6-29
And that obviously means the Spartans have yet to face a quality opponent.
(with apologies to the other teams on the schedule)
Tweet ------------- Remember to check Spartan Headline links, updated real time, at the bottom of the page (Web version only). -------------- Please click on COMMENTS below the post to enter and view reader comments. ***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.blogspot.com/ (Web version only)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)