Michigan State 13th in BCS and Possible MSU Bowl Projections
by Pete Rossman on Nov 27, 2011 8:49 PM CST
in Michigan State Spartans Football
Email
PrintIt's championship week! And State's in it! RAWK. Before the start of championship week coverage here (which I promise I'll have something football related each day), we've got a few rankings to take care of. MSU's 11th in the AP Poll and 9th in the Coaches' Poll, due to Arkansas being 10th in the coaches poll and sixth in the AP (go figure), and USC being ranked at 9 in the AP poll and not ranked at all in the Coaches' poll.
Polls are secondary to the BCS rankings, and Michigan State is 13th due to computer rankings. Remember, BCS bowls can consider only the top 14 teams for at-large bids, which is irreleveant in MSU's case because they'll dip below 14 with a title game loss. I bring this up however because the rankings look like this: 13th, MSU; 14th, Georgia; 15th, Wisconsin; 16th, Michigan; 17th, Baylor.
Now before you search the internet for nelsonmuntz.gif in response to Michigan, consider this --- the loser of the Big Ten title game will most likely fall below 16th in the BCS standings, and Georgia has to face LSU in the SEC title game. This most likely means Michigan will get to at-large consideration. What does this mean for Michigan State? Three things, depending on the outcome of the title game.
- MICHIGAN STATE WINS THE FREAKING BIG TEN TITLE GAME. Party, because MSU is heading to the Rose Bowl to face Oregon, because LOL UCLA. The defensive linemen start running gassers immediately to prepare.
- MICHIGAN STATE LOSES THE FREAKING BIG TEN TITLE GAME, MICHIGAN IS 14TH IN THE BCS STANDINGS OR HIGHER. This most likely means Michigan is going to a BCS bowl, probably the Sugar. I'm guessing the Capital One Bowl will take Nebraska, and then the Outback is faced with a choice between a 10-3 MSU and a 9-3 Penn State squad. I have to believe the Outback selects MSU, and we go to Tampa and tres speedy Ybor City to face an SEC squad, most likely South Carolina or Georgia.
-
MICHIGAN STATE LOSES THE FREAKING BIG TEN TITLE GAME AND MICHIGAN IS 15TH OR LOWER IN THE BCS STANDINGS. Now may not be the best time to look for nelsonmuntz.gif either. If Michigan can't get BCS eligible, they're being selected by either the Capital One or Outback, most likely the Capital One. Nebraska will probably be snapped up by the Outback. This leaves the Insight Bowl in Tempe, and they take MSU (I think they have to, since the championship game loser can't fall farther than the fourth pick? Either way, they're not taking Penn State ahead of MSU). The Spartans will probably face Kansas State in that game.
EDIT: Or not. There's a rule that states that if only one BCS school is in the top 14 from its conference, bowl selection committees can take a team from the top 18. I don't think Michigan's falling below that, so this point could very well be void. However, I'd rather not leave it up to chance.EDIT THE SECOND: This tweet from Jerry Palm will clear things up: "At this time, there would be at least five eligible at-large in the top 14, so no need to go to 18." This means the previous thought stands.
I could be wrong -- the Capital One or Outback could take MSU no matter what happens. The only thing that is 100% is winning the Big Ten title game and heading to the Rose Bowl, so let's just go ahead and win the darn thing, OK?
65 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
You are correct sir
I’ve edited the post to reflect that fact.
by Pete Rossman on Nov 27, 2011 9:40 PM CST up reply actions
Question
Assuming that Michigan is being considered (as of 11/27) for a BCS slot because of their reputation and how well they can draw instead of actual BCS standings…
And assuming other bowls with Big Ten tie-ins will make similar considerations (reputation v. merit)
Let’s then consider the worst-case scenario: State loses the conference championship game and plummets through the bowl order, possibly to the Insight Bowl and Michigan makes a BCS bowl and plays a soft Houston team, as projected…
Are those of you who happily rooted for Michigan’s “help” still happy, when that help wasn’t ever needed? They have enough cheerleaders in the media, both local and national, they don’t need any extra.
http://pittsfieldindex.blogspot.com/
http://www.facebook.com/pages/Pittsfield-Ratings-Index/142673082487903
by PittsfieldIndex on Nov 27, 2011 10:40 PM CST reply actions
Yes
We are the first team ever to qualify for the B1G title game. Does that matter? No, probably not. But no other team will ever have that honor, and I look forward to knowing the answer instantly when it pops up as an AFLAC trivia question some day.
Besides, as much as I can’t stand UM. The BCS and this whole perverted system is at fault when teams (like Alabama and Michigan) are in a better positions than team that beat them and actually won their freaking divisions (LSU, MSU).
I disagree
I was going to be sarcastic, but I decided no to. I can’t think of a time when anyone talked about great teams in terms of who qualified for a championship game earliest.
Occassionally you hear about a team clinching early in MLB, but not as if it’s a major accomplishment. Sweeping a round in the playoffs is nice, but often considered to give a team too much rest.
10-2, double digit wins 2 years in a row…yes, clinching on the second to last week…eh.
I love March Madness, hate the BCS and 90% of people will not even realize it if UM ends up in what the insiders will call a better bowl. None of them are on New Years Day, the NFL has told them to move to Monday.
Well sure
Its not a big deal. Just as I acknowledged in my original post.
Regardless, I am not at all sorry we clinched early. If UM going to a BCS bowl is the price of me not starting to pull my hair out when I had to watch the purple NW arrow (on the espn gamecast) creeping forward 4 yards at a time with the game tied 3-3 in the second quarter last Sat then so be it.
Fair Enough
There is always a little stress in the NW game, often more than there should be, and it was good to know that it wasn’t for all the marbles.
Michigan can go to whatever bowl selects them, based on their legions of Walmart fans and their name cache....
….but no rational observer can claim that the Wolverines are a better team than either of the 2 teams in the B1G CG.
The system isn’t perfect, but it’s what we have today.
Let’s just make the point moot by whooping the Badgers (again)!
"Everyone who drinks is not a poet. Maybe some of us drink because we're not poets." - Arthur Bach
Totally agree
Most seem to forget that we were soundly curb-stomping Wiscy until our defense started playing soft-sagging coverage in the middle of the 4th quarter.
take this for what is worth…
I won’t argue (ney, can’t argue) that Michigan is better than Michigan State, the Spartans proved that in East Lansing.
On paper Wisconsin is the better team than Michigan.. just like on paper they were the better team than Michigan State going in to the game in East Lansing.. but on paper doesn’t mean much.
Michigan’s (not questioning the State dominance in that game) held State to fewer points than Wisconsin did, and using the transitive argument (the same one used by MSU to argue why they were more deserving the tOSU) beat the only other team that Wisconsin lost to this year.
So why can’t a rational person argue that Michigan isn’t just as deserving as or better than Wisconsin?
I’ll be rooting for Sparty to beat Wisconsin again, and would love to see them in the Rose Bowl.
Fair points. I'll concede that on paper Michigan is on par with Wisky.
In a game, however, I would put Wisky as a 14 point fave.
But, prognostication has never been one of my best skills.
"Everyone who drinks is not a poet. Maybe some of us drink because we're not poets." - Arthur Bach
I think the rule is can't go below 4th post-BCS pick, which would be Gator.
But either way, I don’t think we’re getting passed over at that point.
There is one monkey wrench for Michigan, besides the ones listed – Baylor. They play Texas this week and might jump Michigan with a win. (Also, it’s possible, though by no means certain, that we stay ahead if it’s a close loss to Wisconsin; Penn State got blown out and just dropped two spots.)
I've got this terrible pain in all the diodes down my left-hand side.
Bradley-Terry rankings for college football and basketball: because there aren't enough computer rankings already.
"I could be wrong -- the Capital One or Outback could take MSU no matter what happens. The only thing that is 100% is winning the Big Ten title game and heading to the Rose Bowl, so let's just go ahead and win the darn thing, OK?"
you are right, there are walmarts in florida too
If Sparty doesn't get the W in Indy, Capital One will go with the Huskers, sending Sparty to the
Outback. You’ve been to the Capital One too many times, and they’ll want to see some new faces there.
Absolute Garbage
Whoever loses the Championship game finished 2nd in the Big Ten and should go to the best bowl available if they do not quality for the BCS. Furthermore, if UofM is 14 look at the bowls eliminating the championship game because UofM will not make that game
Rose – MSU / Wisconsin vs Oregon
Fiesta – OSU / OU vs At-Large (Stanford )
Orange – Va Tech vs Big East
Sugar – Arkansas vs At Large (OSU if they lose to OU or Houston or Boise State)
There is really 1 at Large spot open because Stanford will get one, and at least 3 teams will have a higher BCS ranking than Michigan if they pick Michigan its a complete farce. Only thing I’m not sure of is can Arkansas be in Sugar Bowl since two SEC teams will be in title game?
If we lose it should be Capital One bowl end of discussion, and I’m sick of that bowl so just beat Wisconsin.
by MSUMC25 on Nov 27, 2011 11:47 PM CST reply actions 2 recs
Arkansas cannot be in the Sugar Bowl if two SEC teams are in the title game
Only Georgia could make a third SEC team because they’d have got the automatic and LSU/Bama would also get auto-bids for being 1/2
They should make that a rule
If you don’t finish at least second in your conference, you should not be in BCS game over someone who did.
Of course, that will never happen, those assholes.
"I believe in a good kick in the ass. This— I believe. " -- Walker Percy
I tweet about stuff sometimes @jackhitts.
What's "second in conference"?
Because UM, Wisconsin, and PSU are tied at 6-2 for “second best in-conefrence record”
by ym13 on Nov 28, 2011 10:01 AM CST up reply actions 1 recs
So...
UCLA > Stanford? Georgia > Alabama?
I mean, I agree with the sentiment, and it is certainly true for the B1G this year. But based on the results of the SEC and Big12 in the past (and the SEC and Pac12 this year), what actually happens is that conference divisions tend to be unbalanced at least as often as they are balanced.
by RoninX on Nov 28, 2011 12:54 PM CST up reply actions 2 recs
Good Point
However, in the case of the Big Ten MSU and Wisconsin are the two best teams and it’s not even close.
Exactly
I mean, you still won your division, you still had a chance to play for the conference title. You finished second. Michigan finished no better than third. Yet they’re still going to a BCS bowl (probabaly) and we aren’t.
"I believe in a good kick in the ass. This— I believe. " -- Walker Percy
I tweet about stuff sometimes @jackhitts.
Sorry...
but it is all about money: selling tickets and butts sitting in couches. The best teams don’t go to the best bowls. Sparty will get there if they continue their performance for the next decade – for now, Michigan has a better perceived value for a bowl game.
I think more objective observers would watch Boise State than Michigan
Honestly, I think they’re the better at-large selection – and one of the best at-large choices overall. Which is hilarious.
Boise State.
My Eyes! My Burning Eyes!
As long as I don’t have to watch them on their blue field.
No. UM still "moves the needle" on a national level in a way Boise can't.
Remember, there are Walmarts everywhere.
"Everyone who drinks is not a poet. Maybe some of us drink because we're not poets." - Arthur Bach
The thing is, lots of people will tune in just to see what Boise does against 'big-time' competition
Think Statue of Liberty. Don’t you want to watch a bowl like that again? Doesn’t everyone?
I think Boise brings more objective folk on the west coast, southwest, and southeast, which is more than what Michigan can account for, even with all their Wal-Marts.
The other factor: a star player
Tiebreaker for bowl supremacy is which team has the flashy Heisman hopeful. Denard Robinson and the Seven Dwarfs would be a great choice, if you ask the TV guys.
No
By your logic, 6-loss UCLA would be the 2nd ranked Pac-12 team over Stanford and Washington because they finished first in the Pac-12 south.
The most sensible thing to do...
Would be to treat CCGs as playoff games.
Bowls should be picked after the CCGs based on the rankings BEFORE CCGs. That way, teams don’t get punished for losing an extra game to a superior opponent — especially one they already beat, like in Michigan State’s case.
It’ll never happen, but it’s worth dreaming about.
by The Birchman on Nov 28, 2011 10:19 AM CST up reply actions
+1
There should never be a system where a team is better off for not having a good enough record to make it to the CG. I’d suggest treating CGs as simply a bonus and basing bowl selections on regular season results, with the exception being that the winner of a CG can make it to whatever affiliated bowl game the conference has.
"It was worth it. Every needle, every dose of medicine that I've taken. That's why you play the game. A chance to be on a Final Four team, a chance to win championships." Delvon Roe
by Ducking Delvon on Nov 28, 2011 12:39 PM CST up reply actions
I agree
that the CCG actually can punish teams like MSU in that there is benefit to winning that is otherwise not available to teams that don’t win their division, but there is also a detriment to losing, that is not available to teams that don’t win.
This season, M is in a no-lose situation: the two best teams on the field in B1G play this year get to duke it out, and M gets to pass one of them in the BCS when the game is over. It’s like the ultimate manner of backing in.
I completely agree that the 12 game regular season standings should be used to pick the bowls, and that the BCS top 14 should be locked as of now. The BCS really only deals with 10 teams, and it would be easy to deal with the issue of one conference having three top-14 teams; for example third team out = team that was lower ranked of the remaining non-CCG winning teams from said conference. So if LSU wins the CCG, Georgia is out; if the Bulldogs win, ’Bama is out.
At the end of the day, we’re really dealing with usually two, and generally no more than four, at large bids per season.
in which case
Georgia would not be rewarded for beating LSU, if that were to happen?
I think it’s a fair system as it is. I wouldn’t say MSU is overwhelmingly better than UM as some people have noted. After all, Sparty did lose to Nebraska, who in turn lost to Mich by a pretty large margin.
Good job, rest of Big 10
I realize Michigan dodged the two best teams in the eastish to have a very soft schedule, but where were you guys?
Agreed
It is interesting that last year people could stop talking about us not playing OSU.
’
The Big Ten Championship Game is MSU (who beat UM) v. UW (UM did not play) – looks like UM really is up there with the elite teams.
Big Ten was pretty even this year
but, yea, UM is overrated
I absolutely want a win against Wisconsin so that we play in the Rose Bowl
but a loss wouldn’t be the worst thing in the world. I also really want to win a bowl game under Dantonio and we’d have a much better shot against Georgia/South Carolina/KSU than we would against Oregon.
We can worry about winning the bowl game when bowl season comes
For now, it’s all about the B1G title.
Much rather lose to Oregon in the Rose Bowl
than beat a weak Big 12 team in the Insight. Dantonio/the program will receive a lot more respect with a Rose Bowl bid. If it means, getting blown out by Oregon, it’s still better than repeating last year’s Capital One Bowl.
88, 32, 7, 21, 17, 31
It's in our hands at least
Something we couldn’t say last year when those damn cheating Buckeyes interposed themselves into a discussion they would have had no right to if they hadn’t played five ineligibles, thus preventing us from being B1G champions all by our lonesome. No one is picking us to beat Wiscy. Let’s shut their pie-holes by taking care of business and then going on to the Rose Bowl!
by heresjohnny on Nov 28, 2011 8:54 AM CST reply actions 1 recs
Opening line for the game has Wiscy as a 10 point favorite
That seems really high to me.
There are a lot of amateur bettors out there
that never watched a B1G game this season (much less a game with either MSU or Wisc) cause the line to be set that high. If the “smart” money (read: professional bettors) think that spread is too high, they will pour money on MSU & cause it to be lowered.
That's what I think will happen too
I’d guess it gets bet down a couple points by game time.
Agreed.
I haven’t updated my numbers yet (will likely do so tomorrow), but I would figure much closer to 5, maybe 6 points at a neutral site. Wisconsin is an absolute death machine at Camp Randall, but they’ve looked mortal (albeit still very good) on the road – their only convincing road performance to any degree was the flattening of Minnesota (which was after the Gophers had turned the corner from “pathetic” to “scrappy but outgunned”). Yet somehow we have the reputation of being crap away from home, despite the fact that we’re the only team in the conference to win three road games against bowl-eligible teams in conference (Penn State was the only other to win three on the road, period, in conference, and one was Indiana).
I've got this terrible pain in all the diodes down my left-hand side.
Bradley-Terry rankings for college football and basketball: because there aren't enough computer rankings already.
It actually opened at 7.5, and has moved to 10 now.
"Everyone who drinks is not a poet. Maybe some of us drink because we're not poets." - Arthur Bach
So who moved it
The amateur money buying all the hype, or the wise guys who saw a chance to cash in?
Not apologizing
Just stating the realities of the situation.
by Pete Rossman on Nov 28, 2011 7:15 PM CST up reply actions
Making my Head Explode
Can anyone say PLAYOFFS!!!!! If you not 1 or 2 the bowls are essentially worthless. That’s why in my opinion winning the conference is much better than getting an at large bid. At least you get a trophy for winning the conference no one is going to remember who played in the Sugar Bowl in 5 years.
by MSUMC25 on Nov 28, 2011 7:31 PM CST reply actions 2 recs
Anyone who thinks that we can regularly identify #1 and #2 with confidence
based on a sample of 10% of a full round-robin, with a large degree of geographic isolation (how many SEC-Big Ten matchups there have been this year? answer: 1, Alabama against Penn State) is deluding himself. It continues to baffle me that sports that have a regular season that theoretically is sufficient to determine the best team (NHL, NBA, MLB at least within each league) have large playoffs, yet the major sport that most desperately needs one doesn’t (or, more accurately, has a comically undersized playoff – to paraphrase the classic punchline, we’ve already established a playoff, now we’re just haggling over the size).
I've got this terrible pain in all the diodes down my left-hand side.
Bradley-Terry rankings for college football and basketball: because there aren't enough computer rankings already.
by SpartanDan on Nov 29, 2011 12:15 AM CST up reply actions 1 recs
I don't mind...
…the bowl system. The old way of conference tie-ins for bowls followed by completely arbitrary polls is fine with me. The BCS just irks because it purports to be more like a playoff, but is just as arbitrary as the old deal and adds the element of the haves of college football ganging together to makes sure they stay haves and the have-nots stay have nots.
If we knew that every year the winner of the Big 10, determined however we in our wisdom decide to determine it, would play the winner of the Pac 12 in the Rose Bowl, as our fathers knew before us, I’d be fine. The BCS system damaged that system and gave us crap in return.
I think a 16-team playoff designed like the basketball tourney (champs of every conference get in, no if ands or buts) would be fun, too, but really anything but the BCS.
by witless chum on Nov 29, 2011 7:59 AM CST up reply actions 1 recs
I agree with our Witless Chum
Why does there have to be a “national championship” game?
IMO, the field is far too large to handle a decent sized playoff (imagine being the 9th, or 17th, or whatever team) and with only being able to play once per week, a playoff with anything more than 4 teams would take too long to play out.
College football did just fine for a number of years with no NCG, rather with polls nominating champions.
Playoffs? Who said anything about playoffs?!
Frankly, in almost every year there are fewer than 8 teams that would have a non-negligible chance of winning 3 straight games against the rest of the top teams in the country. Sure, the 7th, 9th, or 17th teams would be pissed every year (just like team 65 in basketball). But rarely would they have a legit chance of winning any playoff format I have ever seen proposed.
However frequently (as mentioned above) we simply don’t have the sample size to adequately sort out the top 4-5 teams.
As others have said: almost ANYTHING but the BCS.
Disagree, but agree with RoninX
Size of Playoffs – See RoninX’s answer. Arkansas is 8th in the BCS and just got housed by LSU, we don’t need a big field.
Length of Playoffs – Currently, the bowls stretch until January 9th this year.
In a Playoff Scenario with 8 teams there would be 3 rounds (8, 4, 2) and if we go to the calendar I think it plays out very much the same way.
1. First Weekend in December (the 3rd this year) – Conference Championships
2. Second Weekend in December (10th) – Round of 8, at home field of higher seed, or larger pro stadium closest to higher seed. If Houston sneaks in and wants to play at a bigger stadium in Houston, why not?
3. Third Week in December (17th) – Skip and let some the other meaningless bowls play.
4. Fourth Week in December (24th) – Round of 4, at the site of two of the big traditional bowls.
5. Fifth Week in December (31st) – Hey, New Years Weekend, how nice! Skip again, and let the rest of the traditional bowls play.
6. Six Week, now January – Championship Game, which currently gets moved from Saturday to Monday night to catch all those ratings left behind by the lack of MNF during their playoffs.
I’ll answer these before they are asked:
1. I don’t care about the all the meaningless bowls that won’t get an important game, they don’t get one now.
2. The NCAA doesn’t care about alumni/student fan attendance or they wouldn’t play the championship game on a Monday night. The local market will fill enough of the stadium and the TV revenues are all that matter.
I could live with going back to the old way.
At least then everyone knew the title was mythical. The problem with the BCS (well, one of a thousand problems, but the fundamental one that no simple fix can handle) is that it purports to give us a real champion and fails.
I've got this terrible pain in all the diodes down my left-hand side.
Bradley-Terry rankings for college football and basketball: because there aren't enough computer rankings already.
To be fair
The BCS system, despite its flaws, does seem like it has given us a legitimate championship game something like 1/3 to 1/2 of the time (depending on how you define legitimate). Even this year, I’m pretty sure every rationale person (outside of Houston) would agree that we are going to end up with 2 of the top 3 teams playing for the title no matter how next weekend shakes out.
The problem is that that is not what we want! The old system was able to anoint one of the top three teams in the country as Nat. Champ virtually every year – but that wasn’t what we wanted either. What we want is to see a champion earn the belt by entering a field of all the “elite” teams and lay waste to the competition, emerging miraculously unscathed clutching that beautifully sculpted trophy in their steaming bloody hands.
PS
Also enjoyed this take on the BCS system:
http://rivals.yahoo.com/ncaa/football/news?slug=dw-wetzel_football_hostage_illegitimate_bcs_112911
Your promises kind of suck
It’s championship week! And State’s in it! RAWK. Before the start of championship week coverage here (which I promise I’ll have something football related each day), we’ve got a few rankings to take care of
Base Who MSU is on What MSU Does
Come on folks, let’s finally stop basing who MSU is on who UofM is. For years we’ve always said what would be best for BOTH programs would be for them both to be competitive and for the head to head match up to matter. Well guys this year it did. Clearly, MSU has the better team this year over UofM by virtue of winning the head to head match up, even though they have the same final record. Clearly MSU belongs in the Championship Game. So, go out an win the thing and quit worring about what UofM does or gets. If MSU wins, they are confernce champions, they are likely top ten in rankings and they have an opportunity to finish as a Nationally strong program if they can go to the Rose Bowl and beat Oregon who is considered by some to be a team that should be in the BCS Title game. It is in MSU’s hands. UofM has nothing to do with it. But, yet you keep talking about UofM. If you don’t think UofM deserves by merit a shot at a BCS bowl at 10-2 and having beat the only two teams MSU lost to, then I challenge you to think back to all those years when you accused us of wining about not getting better bowl bids or when you did not get better bowl bids when you had very good seasons but were overshaddowed by UofM. Shoes on the other foot right now guys. Stop wining about UofM and start promoting your own program as a National Power. You might find it helps. We’ll see you in Ann Arbor next fall and then we can talk about it again. Good Luck Saturday Night. Go Green.
by acollegefootballfan on Dec 3, 2011 1:23 PM CST reply actions
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
