Who to Root For and Against (You Make the Call!)
[Because who YOU root for definitely makes a difference.]
With the BCS Title Game dream now decisively back out of reach, it's all about (1) getting a share of the Big Ten title and (2) getting to a big-time bowl game--ideally the Granddaddy of Them All. With four teams tied with one loss at the top of the Big Ten standings, how exactly MSU gets there is not immediately clear. To try to sort it all out, I've put together a handy table of plausible scenarios.
First, assumptions:
- MSU, of course, has to win out. So definitely root for that. There are scenarios with a multi-team tie at 2 losses, but (1) the odds of those scenarios occurring are exceedingly small (see SpartanDan's post at OTE for the complete list of such scenarios) and (2) they're even less likely to end well in terms of MSU going to a BCS bowl game. (Note: Even with a loss at Penn State, it looks like MSU should fall no further than #4 in the Big Ten pecking order (likely the Outback Bowl), so WOOOOO!!! New Year's Day bowl. If they somehow lose to Minnesota or Purdue at home, I wouldn't get too bent out of shape about getting sent to any bowl destination.)
- MSU will almost certainly be below Ohio State and Wisconsin in the final BCS rankings if they're tied in number of losses. That's probably true for Iowa, too; beating Ohio State would likely compensate for Iowa's (narrow) out-of-conference loss (to a very good team).
- Similarly, I'm working under the assumption that MSU will be the lowest in the pecking order among potential BCS at-large selections among any teams tied for the Big Ten title. Badgers/Buckeyes/Hawkeyes travel.
- On that note: I'm assuming that the Big Ten will get two BCS slots (automatic bid to the Rose Bowl plus an at-large bid) as long as at least two teams have only one Big Ten loss.
Without further ado, the table (after the jump):
Click to BLOW IT UP.
All very neat, right? The only problem is it's not presented in chronological order. We won't know the winner of the Ohio State-Iowa game for another two weeks. Here's what we know about rooting for upsets over the next two weeks:
- Ohio State losing is unambiguously good. If they end up beating Iowa, then we want them out of the picture to get the tie-breaker down to us and Wisconsin.
- Also true for Iowa. If they end up beating Ohio State, we're looking pretty good regardless, but getting them out of the way would ensure a Rose Bowl trip rather than an any-old-BCS-game trip. (Should have mentioned that earlier. 16 days from now: GO HAWKEYES! BEAT THE BUCKEYES!)
- Wisconsin is where it gets interesting. A Wisconsin loss is good from the perspective of ensuring (or almost ensuring) some sort of BCS trip. But it also takes the Rose Bowl out of the picture. BUT (it's a reverse!) Wisconsin winning out would introduce the SHAFT factor--ending up in a 3-way tie and getting sent to Orlando (which is lovely but not the home of a BCS bowl) despite going 11-1--if Ohio State were to beat Iowa.
For me, the Rose Bowl is the PRECIOUS. It's been 23 years now since the Spartans made the trip to Pasadena. A return would make this pretty clearly the best MSU football season of my lifetime. Dropping to the Capital One bowl despite only losing once would be a bummer, but the gap between the Orange/Sugar/Fiesta Bowl and the SHAFT isn't as big, to me, as the drop between the Rose Bowl and everything else. So I say, "On Wisconsin." (Plus: There's some risk with going for the BCS-game-as-the-floor scenario since it's not an absolute lock we wouldn't get squeezed out of one of the four at-large slots.)
The rest of you will have to choose your own rooting adventure. If you choose differently, the chances are our collective Badger-related rooting will then cancel itself out with the football gods anyway.
In the end, we're back to: GO STATE!
P.S. Adam Rittenberg's less graphical, but national-level, version of "who MSU should root for/against" (specific to this week) is here. He says we want Wisconsin to lose, but only if Iowa loses. I think that only really matters if we care about trying to win the Big Ten title outright--which I do care about, but not that much compared to the rest of it. On the national level, Arizona beating Stanford seems like the key, as that would get the number of BCS conferences with plausible at-large picks down to three (SEC, Big 12, Big Ten).
P.P.S. In terms of plausible losses for Iowa/Ohio State/Wisconsin, outside of the Ohio State-Iowa game, we're really relying on friends in Ann Arbor. Michigan still plays both Wisconsin (at home) and Ohio State (on the road). Formula: top-five offense plus the Badger/Buckeye offense going on the fritz of its own accord for 20-30 minutes.
P.P.P.S. For as much work as it turned out to be, I hope I got all this right. Paging SpartanDan . . .
31 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
I will only root for Michigan against OSU
IF and only if it is clear, that week, that we need an OSU loss for the Rose Bowl.
I guess it would improve RR’s chances of sticking around, that’s an added benefit.
No
1. Since rooting for Michigan will have no impact
2. If Michigan’s win sends us to the Rose Bowl, their gloating about helping us will be insufferable
Schadenfreude ist die schoenste Freude
+1
If a little smack talk from UM fans headed to a MEH bowl game more than offsets the glory of going to Pasadena, then we deserve whatever “inferiority complex” reputation people try to pin on us.
As for your #1, we exited the realm of the rational in the preface to the post.
Fight for The Only Colors: Green and White!
by KJ@theonlycolors on Nov 4, 2010 6:40 PM CDT up reply actions
I'm just saying
I won’t root for them, though I wouldn’t be upset if Ohio State lost to anyone.
Schadenfreude ist die schoenste Freude
Oookay then
Fight for The Only Colors: Green and White!
by KJ@theonlycolors on Nov 4, 2010 7:11 PM CDT up reply actions
ain't got nothing to do with an inferiority complex.
at least for me. i have a deep seated hate for all things UM. i grew up in a family of OSU grads. i’m a state grad, though, and after experiencing their hockey fans in the late 90s, i have my own, honest, hate for UM. i refuse to cheer for them. like Seer, i will be satisfied if they cause a loss we need to get to the rose bowl, but i will never, ever cheer for UM. i know this is cutting off my nose to spite my face.
Comments on a Sweet Post, and Chart!
I feel I need to include the comments of others to fully communicate my thoughts;
1. Seer is correct, rooting for UM will have no impact, they’re going to lose by at least 28. There is no way that OSU will not take advantage of the opportunity to end their season with another win, by a big margin, over a ‘storied’ program and rival. Add to this that if either Oregon or Auburn takes a loss between now and then OSU could be right back in the hunt for the NC. And certainly another loss would not only eliminate them from NC hope, but drop them to a lower bowl.
2. In the era of the BCS, does the Rose Bowl really mean that much any more? I know, here come the traditionalists to tell me I’m an idiot, but I’d rather win any other Jan 1 bowl than lose the Rose. Outside of the traditionalists, I think most people end up remembering wins and losses and whether or not you won your bowl. Unless it’s the NC game, and this won’t be. I’d much rather be able to say that we went 12-1 and won the Orange than we went 11-2, but we lost in the Rose Bowl which is like winning any other bowl. ????
3. Another point that will make me less popular, but I think the Iowa game showed that we are not the 5th best team in the country and maybe even the 10th. Let’s not get crushed by the 7th ranked Nebraska the year before they enter the Big Ten, how about beating the Arkansas or South Carolina or Oklahoma State (all 17th in some poll today).
*Question: Does one of the bowl committee’s look for a Nebraska v. Big Ten match-up as a pre-cursor to next season?
To recruits, the Rose matters much more
To the athletic department, the Rose matters much more.
To most fans, the Rose matters much more.
So yes, I’d say the Rose is better then some Capital One crapfest*.
*bear in mind I usually wouldn’t feel this way, but after starting a season 8-0, you come to hope the likes of the Capital One Bowl are behind you
Really?
Recruits – The BCS began in 1996 (14 years ago) which means that a 16 year old recruit doesn’t even remember when the Rose Bowl was the Big Ten – Pac Ten championship, or care why they call it, “The Grand Daddy of Them All”. He remembers the teams that win a lot, get on TV and get players in the Pro’s.
The Athletic Department – Who Cares? Sorry, this may seem rude, but really, who cares? I heard that the band wanted to go to Pasedena too, so they could go to Disney!
The Fans – So you’re saying if they had a chance to play in the NC and it wasn’t the Rose Bowl, you’d rather play in the Rose Bowl? I just don’t see it, the traditional bowls were trashed by the BCS and will be largely left behind when the playoff system is established after the babyboomers running college football finally die.
Capital One – I just don’t see our only two options as Rose or one of the 5 totally meaningless bowls, there is a nice middle ground.
One season of 8-0 does not turn us into a team that can scoff at other Jan 1 bowl games, or really even the Capital One. UM used to do that, not too long ago.
Um
Point one – it’s still the Big Ten – Pac-10 championship. And recruits obviously do care, as evidenced by their constant mention of Dantonio selling the MSU program to them by having the recruits envision themselves in Pasadena, playing in the Rose Bowl. Case in point – even though Michigan has won half a national title since the 50’s, this is college football. Tradition will always matter.
Point two – Perhaps you don’t realize, but the payout for a BCS game to the school going is large. Much larger than a non-BCS bowl, in fact. More money → better facilities → more allotted recruiting resources → happy athletic department. It’s safe to say everyone cares. Who understands how the system works, that is.
Point three – That’s an idiotic assessment – and that’s being kind. Fans would much, much rather travel to Pasadena and go to the Rose Bowl than get their Disney (World) on, but if it was in competition, the national championship would obviously win. I can’t believe I’m actually forced to say this, but here I am, actually saying it.
Point four – I’m not scoffing at the Capital One Bowl, I was merely saying I wished we were beyond this after having such a stellar start to the season, and I was doing so with a little bit of ‘exotic flair’.
So no. Whether you think you’re wrong or not, it doesn’t really matter. You’re wrong. And that’s not even evaluating the reasoning behind the notion that it would be ‘easier to win’ at the Capital One Bowl this year than it would be at Pasadena. The Rose is obligated to take a non-AQ qualifier if one of their participants is in the national title game, which begs that question to be asked.
Ordinarily, the Cap One would be great.
But as a reward for an 11-1 season if we get there, not so much.
In the era of the BCS, I think the Rose Bowl is probably the _only_ game that really matters "more"
More concretely, I really want one of these, in a darker shade of green:
![]()
Fight for The Only Colors: Green and White!
by KJ@theonlycolors on Nov 5, 2010 10:25 AM CDT up reply actions
Hard to Argue With That.
Period. End of discussion.
Thanks for contributing.
That about sums it up.
I’d argue that the Big Ten is going to get an 11-1 at-large if there is one, ahead of any Pac-10 team. One big point in our favor: the Rose can’t take a Pac-10 at-large to replace Oregon (assuming they are replacing Oregon), and the Fiesta gets last pick (i.e. whoever wins the Big East). The Orange (and, to a lesser extent, the Sugar) would be far more likely to take a Big Ten team rather than somebody who has to go 4,000 miles – and Pac-10 teams in general don’t have much of a reputation for traveling well to bowls. I also like our chances ahead of any Big XII team, mostly because the title game loser will have two losses and there’s a high probability they won’t have a one-loss to give an at-large to (Missouri is a possibility, but if it’s OSU/MSU/Iowa/Wisconsin or Missouri, the Big Ten team’s going to win that beauty pageant almost every time). I suspect the at-large bids will be SEC, Big Ten, TCU/Utah winner, Boise (although there’s a possibility a Big XII team replaces Utah or Boise).
Given the assumption that the Big Ten gets an at-large at 11-1 regardless of any other considerations and the assumption that we win out (BCS talk is obviously moot if that doesn’t happen), a Wisconsin loss pretty much ensures a BCS bid for us but we’d need both Iowa and OSU to lose to get to Pasadena; on the other hand, if Wisconsin wins out we really need OSU to lose to somebody.
Root for Iowa over Ohio State
Iowa would then only beat MSU in a two-way tie. MSU would win a three way tie with Iowa and Wisconsin. If OSU wins vs Iowa, MSU needs way too much help for a Rose bowl or other BCS berth to be probable.
The sideline is always greener at MSU.
KJ you missed it.
KJ-
Rittenberg is right regarding us wanting Wiscy to lose ONLY if Iowa loses. AND IT HAS MORE TO DO THAN JUST WINNING THE BT OUTRIGHT. MSU is guaranteed a Rose Bowl if the three way tie is MSU/Iowa/Wisky, because of the tiebreakers. Which someone else can explain. But if it is a two way with Iowa we lose, hence we want Wiscy to win as long as Iowa does so as well.
Well, I'm not sure I "missed it"
but I was perhaps somewhat contradictory (if Rose Bowl is main goal, we don’t want/need Wisconsin to lose at all). Anyway, I’d say your final sentence is a more accurate statement than Rittenberg’s.
Fight for The Only Colors: Green and White!
by KJ@theonlycolors on Nov 5, 2010 6:31 AM CDT via mobile up reply actions
Right
Wisconsin winning out improves our chances at the Rose Bowl (we need the Iowa/OSU winner to drop another game if Wisconsin loses) but also gives the only plausible “shaft” scenario.
Pulling for Michigan
I have no problem hoping Michigan wins. It keeps RichRod around longer AND we stand to improve our bowl chances? Sign me up. Michigan fans can talk all they want about MSU needing their assistance. I, for one, won’t be watching them play in the Insight Bowl.
Rooting for Michigan
You have got to be out of your mind to root against Michigan if it comes down to them sending us to the Rose Bowl with a win. I don’t care how much you hate Michigan. That is just dumb to root for MSU to go to a worse bowl.
Even still, we won’t know what’s going on anyways as the odds are that UM-OSU will be a noon game and MSU-PSU will be a 3:30 kick as it seems to be most recent years.
semantics?
I think some people just “can’t” root for UM for any reason, so they will root against team UM is playing, hoping that team (OSU, in this case) loses, but somehow not hoping UM wins.
make sense? no. but if it helps ’em sleep at night, who cares.
As long as we get a share of the title I'm satisfied
It has been two decades since we did that, and at this point I don’t give a crap about whether we win tie breaker x to go to the Rose Bowl (well, I care a little bit, but really not that much) so long as we finish with a share of the title and bring home a trophy.
No,
because they don’t include the scenario we don’t want to think about: MSU loses a game (14%).
Fight for The Only Colors: Green and White!
by KJ@theonlycolors on Nov 5, 2010 2:10 PM CDT up reply actions
My Bad
I assumed these were conditional probabilities, given the assumption that MSU wins out. If MSU loses, then it’s all a moot point.
by Sparty_Cyclone on Nov 7, 2010 9:15 AM CST up reply actions

by 





















