Responding to a Few Criticisms on the Michigan State Spartans
by Pete Rossman on Jun 22, 2011 7:34 AM CDT
in Michigan State
Email
PrintHi everyone! My name's Pete and I write for SB Nation's Michigan State blog, The Only Colors. Graham asked me to write on a couple of topics, and I chose this one. Before we begin however, one note: SINCE THE NICE FOLKS AT OTE HAVE GIVEN ME THE POWER OF EDITOR, TROLLS WILL BE BANNED. Please and thank you! Here's the idea I chose for this column:
Many people have made a big issue that MSU's 11-2 team was actually an 8-4 team because a) they weren't really great at one thing, b) they got killed in two important games, and c) they got lucky to beat NW, ND, and Purdue, three unimpressive teams. What say you to this? What does Spartan Nation think about 2010?
A. They weren't great at any one thing, just very good at a lot of things- and that was good enough.
Looking at my handy-dandy Phil Steele's 2011 College Football Preview, Michigan State's offense was good to very good at times, and their stat rankings in Big Ten games confirm this hunch. While Michigan State only ranked third or better in two categories (2nd in pass completion percentage, 3rd in sacks allowed), they only ranked below sixth in one category, which came in at 7th in the conference. The defense was better, as they ranked either 2nd, 3rd or 4th in all categories except one, turnovers forced, in which they were sixth. Aaron Bates, Dan Conroy, and Keshawn Martin were all special teams players par excellence, and you're most likely aware of the play calling.
One thing you shouldn't complain about? Michigan State Cheerleaders. See our feature piece with Spartan cheerleader Kailey Forbes today on OTE.
Here's my point - Michigan State did everything either well or well enough to have no glaring weaknesses. You know who did one thing really well? Michigan, and that got them to 7-5 and a shellacking by Mississippi State in their bowl game.
B. They got killed in two important games - this is something that happened. I can't deny that.
First off, on Alabama - most teams in the nation would've been killed by that Crimson Tide team in Orlando this New Year's Day. This was a squad that was mentally the antithesis of the team that got nicely seared by Utah two years previous. They took a few losses in the SEC because they were banged up a bit, but got healthy by Christmas and responded by knocking not one, but two Spartan quarterbacks out. Spencer Hall said that he felt legitimately scared for MSU in this game, and I'd have to agree with him. Before I develop PTSD, let's move on.
On Iowa - yes, this was a bad, bad loss. MSU's offensive line couldn't block at all this game, resulting in 50 rushing yards on 20 attempts, and helped pressure three interceptions out of Kirk Cousins (forgotten about this game - Cousins was 21 of 29 for 198 yards in this game. There's always a "but" though). Likewise, Iowa exploited the Spartan defense on long drives and short. To sum up how soft MSU's defense was on the day, Ricky Stanzi had a 26 yard RUN.
The only defense I have to these losses are that they are the only blemishes on the 2010-2011 season. For every loss there were 5.5 wins, which is a pretty darn good ratio if you ask me. This leads into a point I'll make in the next section - no matter how sloppy, wins are still wins gosh darn it.
C. They got lucky to beat NW, ND, and Purdue, three unimpressive teams.
You make your own luck, Gig. You know what makes a good loser? Practice. - Ernest Hemingway
Yes, there was an element of luck involved in all three of those wins. HOWEVA, it wasn't all luck. In the Notre Dame and Northwestern games Mark Dantonio had the gumption (the coarser among you may refer to gumption as "balls") to pick up a win and fourth down respectively on fakes. The Purdue game turned on a punt block, as Michigan State recovered the ball on the Purdue three-yard line and scored the winning touchdown from there.
So while Michigan State needed a bit of luck to escape with wins in all three of those games, the coaches' decisions on special teams (this statement assumes the coaches called for a punt block against Purdue) put Michigan State in a position to win.
And as I said before, they were close wins - and I'm going to put this in all caps because I've heard this criticism more than once - AT LEAST THEY WERE WINS. There were only three Big Ten teams to have less than five losses last year. Michigan State was one of them, and I'm pretty sure that means something.
Michigan State probably won't go 11-1 in the regular season - they go to Notre Dame, Nebraska, Iowa, Northwestern, and open the Big Ten in Columbus against Ohio State players who didn't have a second source of income. That's a lot of road games in hostile environments (save Northwestern) to overcome. They're not the flash in the pan the 2007 Illini were though, and will contend for the Big Ten North (not Legends) title this year.
51 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Well
They’re not the flash in the pan the 2007 Illini were though
Well no one will ever be that much of a flash in the pan again. Except maybe the Illini in 2016.
So whats your prediction
For this season’s record?
My guess? 9-3.
First thing that popped into my head.
by Pete Rossman on Jun 22, 2011 8:23 AM CDT up reply actions
I see Sparty as a def. contender in their division
but with the losses on the defensive side of the ball, I can also see them dropping the games they “luckily” won last year. I’m thinking 8-4 or 9-3 is being realistic.
no matter how sloppy, wins are still wins gosh darn it.
The 2002 Buckeyes would like to endorse this statement
With the #1 overall pick in the Rapture Draft, God chooses the Macho King Randy Savage
by BuckeyeSki on Jun 22, 2011 8:24 AM CDT reply actions 1 recs
2002 Iowa Hawkeyes?
Editor at BT Powerhouse, a Big Ten Basketball blog.
Author at Acme Packing Company, a Green Bay Packers blog
"If you don't tell him what he wants to hear, he's going to find you out. And when he does, they're going to tear your head off and throw your BODY OUT OF AN AIRLOCK!" - Number Six, "Bastille Day"
by OBrienSchofieldismyHero on Jun 23, 2011 3:13 PM CDT up reply actions
Wait, what?
2002 Iowa had sloppy wins? Margin of victory, from smallest to largest:
+3 Purdue (back when they were a pretty good team)
+5 at Miami (OH) (Roethlisberger’s sernior season, Miami’s only loss that year)
+7 (OT) at #12 Penn State
+16 at Indiana
+17 Wisconsin
+24 at Minnesota
+25 at #8 Michigan
+28 Michigan State
+36 Akron
+41 Utah State
+52 Northwestern (should have saved some of those points for future games, apparently)
by cbrett42 on Jun 25, 2011 10:00 AM CDT up reply actions 1 recs
Iowa's offense fell asleep at the switch against Indiana in the 2nd half.
They still won by 16, but considering just how bad IU was in 2002, that Iowa offense could and should have ripped them to shreds the way they obliterated Northwestern.
Editor at BT Powerhouse, a Big Ten Basketball blog.
Author at Acme Packing Company, a Green Bay Packers blog
"If you don't tell him what he wants to hear, he's going to find you out. And when he does, they're going to tear your head off and throw your BODY OUT OF AN AIRLOCK!" - Number Six, "Bastille Day"
by OBrienSchofieldismyHero on Jun 26, 2011 7:17 PM CDT up reply actions
Well said, Pete
And I wouldn’t call it luck – I would call it the third part of the team, Special Teams, helping to earn wins. For a good, not great, team like last year’s MSU squad, ST is easily good for at least 2 W’s.
And it’s not just gutsy playcalling, either (though Little Giants will live in Spartans lore forever). True freshman Dan Conroy led the B1G in FG%, Aaron Bates led the conference in net yards per punt (and presumably, in walk-off overtime TD pass completions by a punter), and RS frosh Kevin Muma averaged 64.5 yds/kickoff. Not to mention that the big momentum turning event in the Wisconsin game was the punt return TD by Keshawn Martin.
I think it’s apparent – if a team emphasizes its special teams, that team is giving itself a leg up over our B1G brethren (U-M under RR, I’m looking at you) that ignore the third aspect of a football game.
Pretty sure ST wasn't the only aspect being ignored
“How do you feel the 3-3-5 worked out for you in the B1G Gerg?”
With the #1 overall pick in the Rapture Draft, God chooses the Macho King Randy Savage
Can't agree with this enough
I think it’s apparent – if a team emphasizes its special teams, that team is giving itself a leg up over our B1G brethren (U-M under RR, I’m looking at you) that ignore the third aspect of a football game.
That was an aspect of Tressel’s last team that I found especially disturbing, more so because it violates the whole concept of “Tresselball”.
I agree that Sparty will contend for the division title
Travelling to Iowa City and Lincoln will be tough, though. I think they lose both of those games and finish the season 3-2 in the division. The winner of the M&N+Iowa division will probably have a 4-1 divisional record.
Slightly different answer
They weren’t great at any one thing, just very good at a lot of things. I think this is the Spartan identity. We don’t have the brand, and don’t pay for players, so we coach up the guys we get and play as a team in all areas of the game. I’ll take that. 2-3 more years of this level of play (and wins over UM) and we’ll get a few of those key players.
They got killed in two important games. Sure, but we won (as least) 3 other important games. The UM game will always be important to MSU, and the ND (historic program, nice tight rivalry over the past 15 years) and Wisconsin (co-champion, Rose Bowl participant) games were important by any reasonable measure.
They got lucky to beat NW, ND, and Purdue, three unimpressive teams. This was on another thread, and started by another author, but the idea that turnovers and quality special teams play is luck is naive. A good pass rush and smart DB’s create interceptions. Hard hitting players that know to strip the ball on the way to the ground create fumbles. And recognizing that you have a high school QB that can still throw and practicing and executing the fake feild goal is good coaching and discipline. Growing as a program means winning these games because you pay attention to these elements of the game.
When the traditional powers lose to the rest of us they say it’s either luck or trick plays that aren’t real football. I disagree.
Causing fumbles is definitely a skill.
But haven’t studies shown that recovering fumbles is a matter of luck? Obviously, a defense that causes more fumbles creates more opportunities to recover them, but unless they’re straight stealing the ball from the offense there has to be some luck involved with fumble recoveries.
by The Mexican't on Jun 22, 2011 9:27 AM CDT up reply actions
Anyone who has played football
on the defensive side of the ball, knows this to be 100% true
With the #1 overall pick in the Rapture Draft, God chooses the Macho King Randy Savage
First you threaten the ban hammer...
then you make a dorky joke bout the division names.
No wonder we can’t get a full-time State writer on this blog.
I would disagree that Sparty historically is
good at many things but doesn’t excel in any one thing. Teams that are good in many things are consistent teams, and Sparty has been anything but that, except in the last few years. That said, I really think MSU has an opportunity to grab some serious recruits because of UM’s downturn and the expected shitstorm that’s going to hit Columbus and really make a move to the upper ranks of the conference.
"Lord I pray for the eyes of an eagle, the heart of a lion and the balls of a combat helicopter pilot."
I will continue to repeat this until hopefully the facts stick.
If your only memory of what Spartan football “is” is colored by the regimes of John Bobby L. Williams Smith, then you are correct in assuming that our only consistency is our inconsistency.
However as I contuinue to repeat, those two coaches were historical anomalies in relation to nearly every other coach that has helmed the Spartans.
That their 38-43 (combined) record got them each fired as quickly as it did speaks to our expectations for, as well as the histiory of the program.
by MSULaxer27 on Jun 22, 2011 4:06 PM CDT up reply actions 1 recs
No, I remember the George Perles teams pretty well
along with Saban’s teams, and I remember those teams in the same way, at least to an extent. Perles and Saban were better coaches, obviously, but MSU has always struck me as a team that whenever they seem to move forward, they stall out, because they are an inconsistent team.
Perles and Saban were both over .500, but other than Saban’s last season, MSU was essentially a .500 team while he was there. For Perles, every time it seemed he got MSU to step up, the following season they would take just as big a step back and stunt whatever momentum they had.
I’m not an MSU historian, and I freely admit my memories are more anecdotal than a hardcore Sparty fan, but I stand by my observation that MSU has been one of the more inconsistent teams in the conference for a long time, while under Dantonio they seem to have made significant progress.
"Lord I pray for the eyes of an eagle, the heart of a lion and the balls of a combat helicopter pilot."
You are correct to an extent.
Perles final years were ruined by his quest for godhood to become imperator Athletic Director/ Football coach, culminating in his use of ineligible players in 1994 and the later forfeiture of that entire season. Even still he managed to finish with a .500 record.
Saban spent the next 4 years pulling the program out of the wreckage. Year 5 brought contention for a B1G title and a disputed Citrus bowl berth. 4 out of Saban’s 5 years State went to a bowl game and never had a losing record (in conference or overall). We were poised for greatness. I firmly believe had he not left (some of this can be blamed on Perles and the afore mentioned infighting between Pres,BOT and Athletics) we would have won the B1G in 2000.
We were 11-2 and have nothing to appologize for
Yes, we lost two games big, and won a couple close ones. Even dominant teams with undefeated seasons have a squeaker or two, often against mediocre teams.
I don’t think anyone in the Spartan fanbase is expecting a National Championship, or even a B1G championship, but we’re expecting to challenge for the division title, which gives us a shot at a B1G championship and a very good bowl. We have a lot of talent and experience coming back this year. We’re not a bunch of pretenders just because we had a couple of rather embarassing losses last year.
by TheCrestedHelm on Jun 22, 2011 11:43 AM CDT reply actions 2 recs
You need to apologize for getting embarrassed by Alabama
Other than that, I agree with everything you said.
"Lord I pray for the eyes of an eagle, the heart of a lion and the balls of a combat helicopter pilot."
by Ted Glover on Jun 22, 2011 2:36 PM CDT up reply actions 3 recs
We'll apologize for losing to Alabama when you apologize for getting shellacked by UF and LSU.
And your head coach acting like OSU was the northernmost school in the SEC.
by MSULaxer27 on Jun 22, 2011 3:54 PM CDT up reply actions 6 recs
Damn
I got nothin’…
"Lord I pray for the eyes of an eagle, the heart of a lion and the balls of a combat helicopter pilot."
looking good
ill have to agree with everything the crested helm said above. theres no reason why we cannot compete every year for a division title game. and from there? who knows.
the depth we finaly have is something thats really amazing. and very overlooked when it comes to our succss.
i feel a 9-3 season this year. the road schedule is so tough. but if we start 5-0 (which would include wins @ND and @OSU) we should be well on our way to replicating last year.
Just to clarify
I don’t think we’ll compete every year – just this year, based on having a very good senior quarterback and a lot of other experience and skill coming back. I guess if we hang on to our upward trend for a couple more years we might become a perennial challenger, but a more realistic expectation is we’re close to but above .500 in the “down” years and challenge for the title every 3-4 years when the stars align. Sort of like Iowa and Wisconsin now.
by TheCrestedHelm on Jun 23, 2011 1:01 PM CDT up reply actions
You can't start denigrating teams
…based on how convincing their wins are. This is particularly true in conference play.
It’s the BIg Ten. Every team is talented. Almost every team plays defense. Almost all of the coaches are exceptional. That means the margin of victory is often going to be razor thin.
A team that blows everyone out is a juggernaut. But a Big Ten team that grinds out a few close games, and goes 11-2 is still a damn good football team.
And yeah, the poster that brought up the Buckeyes last National Title team hit it on the head. Sometimes ‘solid’ teams defeat ‘great’ ones.
I feel like any team in the country would have lost to Alabama had they lined up against them that day
So I really don’t feel bad about that loss. I didn’t feel bad about it when it was snowballing early in the first half, and I didn’t feel bad about it when Alabama scored its first touchdown.
Know when I felt bad? When I finally resigned myself to the fact that the Spartans were going to have to be that sacrificial lamb.
And, for further clarification
That resignation came a few days before the final BCS standings were announced.
We got screwed. But anyone put in our position would have gotten screwed. So, yeah.
Haha, turns out if the author threatens to ban for trolling
comment counts go from 200+ to barely over 20. Hilarious.
we get the joke, but he's pointing out the fact that people really aren't commenting all that much
so even though it’s a joke, it seems to have an effect on the thread even if that’s because MSU fans are few and far between(on this site at least).
Skol!
It's been a nice break from the absurdity of the last few stories.
Which just devolved into a pissing contest between the new resident troll and every other commenter on the site.
by The Mexican't on Jun 22, 2011 8:15 PM CDT up reply actions
I witnessed far too many "bad luck" moments
in person during the JLS regime.
Off the top of my head, I can only remember one instance of “bad luck” under Dantonio. Shocking – when teams are coached well, they are better prepared for any number of adverse events.
Bottom line: The concept of luck is a silly argument thrown around by fans to rationalize things they don’t like – ask any UM fan about MSU, you’ll understand.
Hmm..
This article did nothing but prove to me that Michigan State had a good team that was fortunate enough to win 11 games. Fortunate meaning having one of the easiest schedules, if not THE easiest, in the Big Ten and getting a good win against a Wisconsin team that played a bad game. I can’t argue that a win is a win, but I can argue that your team might not be as good as their win percentage when they squeak by the basement dwellers (in more than one case), and lose by more than 30 to two separate teams.
Now this is coming from a Hawkeye fan that encountered some horribly close wins in 2009. Starting off your season having to block 2 consecutive field goals to beat an FCS team is not a good way to get your AP votes, but considering that Iowa held a high level of play and CONSISTENTLY BEAT OR STAYED WITHIN A TOUCHDOWN OF WINNING OR TYING THE GAME, I consider them more worthy of 11 wins than MSU.
Yes, MSU deserved winning those games, but was it impressive or done with a consistently high level like that of a BCS worthy team? No.
"There is nothing better than being American. If you don't love it, leave it. U.S.A. #1"- Ricky Stanzi, America's Quarterback
The only thing this article is missing is one (HUGE) factor.
Strength of schedule. Yes, those statistics look impressive when you are looking at straight-up football statistics, but they definitely mean nothing, perhaps even strengthen Iowa’s case, when you look at SOS.
In 2009, Iowa might have played some close games, but when you consider WHERE they played them, not to mention WHO they played, it gets impressive.
Iowa’s SOS in the 2009 season ended up being the 9th toughest in the nation, and at one point peaked at 2nd.
Michigan State’s SOS in the 2010 season was ranked 31st… putting them far behind co-champs Wisconsin and OSU. In fact, even Iowa had a stronger SOS in 2010 despite having virtually all the ‘tough’ games at home.
Now I will back that up.
I will use all post-season final rankings because I find them more accurate than rankings at the time of the game.
Iowa 2009
@ #8 Penn State = W
@ #16 Wisconsin = W
@ NR Michigan State = W (Included for sake of memories)
vs. NR Northwestern = L
@ #5 Ohio State = L
N #11 Georgia Tech = W
Michigan State 2010
vs. #8 Wisconsin = W
@ NR Iowa = L
BG #11 Alabama = L
Hmm.. last time I checked, beating three ranked teams on their home turf is much harder to do than beat one ranked team at home. And if my calculations are right, I believe that Iowa would probably struggle to keep a halftime lead moreso than Michigan State would. So I have no doubt that your article shows legit statistics and pretty numbers. But they are just numbers on paper if they aren’t weighted. And those aren’t weighted. So, Myth article = Busted.
"There is nothing better than being American. If you don't love it, leave it. U.S.A. #1"- Ricky Stanzi, America's Quarterback
The Big Ten was down last year
Not our fault that there weren’t many teams ranked at the end of the season. As far as league play goes, we did dodge OSU, but we also didn’t get to play Indiana, so I don’t see that our conference schedule last year was much, if any, weaker than anyone else’s.
by TheCrestedHelm on Jun 23, 2011 1:15 PM CDT up reply actions
Big Ten had a down year?
Lets do a comparison. (pre-bowl season)
2009 / 2010
11-win teams: 0 / 3
10-win teams: 3 / 0
9-win teams: 1 / 0
8-win teams: 1 / 0
7-win teams: 0 / 4
.500 or worse: 6 / 4
Not only did 2010 have teams with higher win percentages, they had more teams battling in the middle of the pack consistently and less teams that finished with a losing record.
And no, it’s not your fault that many teams weren’t ranked at the end of the season. But guess what? It’s not ours either. But that doesn’t mean you get a free pass. To me, the 2010 Spartans didn’t prove much. All they did was prove they were an above average team that was fortunate to beat a strong Wisconsin team, and then self-destruct when they played anyone who gave them a challenge away.
Take away Wisconsin, Iowa and Alabama, and you played teams with an overall record of 49-62.
That is the equivalent of playing 10 teams that average a 5-7 record.
Not to mention, you only played FOUR away games during the season. And the 3 that you didn’t get absolutely crushed in were against 3 teams that went 7-6.
Your SOS was ranked 72nd in the nation before your bowl game. Iowa was ranked #1 by the BCS computers due in large part to their SOS. They only got ranked as high as #4 because the AP poll only ranked them as #8. It was the opposite for MSU. Michigan State played such crappy teams that they couldn’t move up in the BCS rankings because their SOS was so bad.
So yeah, Michigan State might feel like it’s unfair because it’s not their fault the teams they played sucked (and they didn’t), but in reality, it’s your losses that reveal why you don’t deserve what you thought you did. Talk to Boise State and TCU about not having a strong enough schedule, then come back and whine.
"There is nothing better than being American. If you don't love it, leave it. U.S.A. #1"- Ricky Stanzi, America's Quarterback
by Gookin on Jun 23, 2011 2:50 PM CDT up reply actions 1 recs
SOS killed Wisconsin in 2006
and it killed MSU this year.
In any case, BLAME BARRY ALVAREZ!
Editor at BT Powerhouse, a Big Ten Basketball blog.
Author at Acme Packing Company, a Green Bay Packers blog
"If you don't tell him what he wants to hear, he's going to find you out. And when he does, they're going to tear your head off and throw your BODY OUT OF AN AIRLOCK!" - Number Six, "Bastille Day"
by OBrienSchofieldismyHero on Jun 23, 2011 3:15 PM CDT up reply actions
Who's the one whining?
We’re OK with an 11-2 record and 7-1 in conference. You’re the one who’s whining on and on about how it somehow offends you that we went 11-2. In what way did we receive anything we didn’t deserve? We don’t make the conference schedule so we had no control over not playing OSU. We played by the rules, beat the teams in front of us, and legitimately won a share of the Big Ten title. It’s not like they gave us a National Championship or something.
by TheCrestedHelm on Jun 23, 2011 3:50 PM CDT up reply actions 1 recs
Woah now,
all I was saying was that you had virtually the easiest path to 11 wins in the Big Ten since the Big Ten started. And this was mainly a reply to the guy up there trying to say that MSU was better than 2009 Iowa.
"There is nothing better than being American. If you don't love it, leave it. U.S.A. #1"- Ricky Stanzi, America's Quarterback
by Gookin on Jun 23, 2011 4:01 PM CDT up reply actions 1 recs
Not saying we were as good as Iowa in 2009
Although we may have been as good in conference, if indeed the conference was “up” last year (as you claimed above). We only lost one game. Granted we dodged OSU, but if you replace one of the middle of the pack teams we played (say, to pick a team a random, 4-4 Iowa) with them and we lose, we still wind up with the same record.
by TheCrestedHelm on Jun 24, 2011 3:27 PM CDT up reply actions
Whoa now, I never said that last year was better than 2009 in the Big Ten.
I was just saying that using that as an excuse won’t work. The fact is, is that MSU was fortunate to beat Wisconsin at home. That is the only way they proved themselves. Ever.
That’s it.
Iowa beat the #8, #11, and #16 teams in the nation. All away from home. We were in the game the WHOLE time against Ohio State and Northwestern when we lost to them.
Michigan State was down by 30 at the half at Iowa. We won’t even speak of the Alabama game.
The Michigan State team’s next quality win behind Wisconsin was Notre Dame. Iowa beat 6 teams with an equal or better win percentage than Notre Dame.
Hell, Iowa even beat the best Iowa State team in almost a decade in Ames.
I’m sorry, but beating 10 teams with an overall win percentage of 44% is never going to impress me. Even if you beat Wisconsin. You need more than one quality win to impress me.
"There is nothing better than being American. If you don't love it, leave it. U.S.A. #1"- Ricky Stanzi, America's Quarterback
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
Related FanPosts on Off Tackle Empire
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Certain photos copyright © 2012 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
