T1B

Posted: **Mon Oct 02, 2006 5:30 pm**

The only real question is does Sparty have any pride left?

There is no doubt in my mind that Stanton will play this week, you'd have to put him in a straight jacket and haul him away before a guy like him would miss this. This is his last chance to beat Michigan, and what better way than to do to it in the Big House and ending an undefeated season.

I have a lot of respect for Stanton, but all that being said...I just don't see it happening. John L hasn't beaten Michigan yet, he had 2 opprotunities to do so when Michigan wasn't playing well and he couldn't seal the deal.

If Michigan gets up early this could get ugly.

I will have a prediction later in the week.

Posted: **Mon Oct 02, 2006 5:34 pm**

BR, shouldn't your sig also include something about Nebraska, or at least some mention of a bowl game too?

You gotta include a bowl game on your little laundry list there. This is Michigan we're talking about here. Just sayin'.

Posted: **Mon Oct 02, 2006 5:39 pm**

Is there anyone else left for John L to lambaste?

He's done it to his players. He's done it to his coaches.

Now he's doing it to himself, saying he doesn't know how to prepare his players, doesn't know how to get them up for a game.

Michigan wins big. I'm not going to give a final score. They'll win by at least 14, but probably closer to 25-30.

Posted: **Mon Oct 02, 2006 5:56 pm**

Mgo, assuming a pasting this week at the hands of Michigan, is there any chance dude keeps his job over the off season?

Posted: **Mon Oct 02, 2006 6:02 pm**

I predict that by game's end, MSU players will attempt to plant a flag right in John L's forehead.

Posted: **Mon Oct 02, 2006 6:20 pm**

MSU-Illinois replay is on Denver TV......right now. ugly.

Posted: **Mon Oct 02, 2006 6:24 pm**

Van wrote:BR, shouldn't your sig also include something about Nebraska, or at least some mention of a bowl game too?

I dont think BlindRef hopes to play a BigXII north team in a bowl game.....

Michigan would have to tank the second part of the season to play Nebraska.

Posted: **Mon Oct 02, 2006 6:32 pm**

No, Van, I think he'd have to go undefeated from this point forward just to have a shot at retaining his job.

Even then, the damage might already be done. The only thing worse I can think of than a string of meltdowns leadings to Ls, would be getting up in front of the media, continuously, and saying how you've lost control of your team. If he can't control his own emotions and outbursts, then he sure as hell can't control a whole roster of 19 and 20 year olds.

And no matter how painfully obvious that might be, you just don't get up in front of that podium and actually admit it.

Not until you've been canned, at least, or are in the process of stepping down.

I still think John L is a pretty decent football coach. He can build an offense like no other, and he'll be fine at another mid-tier program. He just isn't cutout for the pressures that is coaching at a high level like in the Big Ten.

And most people aren't.

State's just one of those programs that will have to continue cycling through coaches until they find their guy.

Posted: **Mon Oct 02, 2006 6:39 pm**

Mr T wrote:
Van wrote:BR, shouldn't your sig also include something about Nebraska, or at least some mention of a bowl game too?
I dont think BlindRef hopes to play a BigXII north team in a bowl game.....

Michigan would have to tank the second part of the season to play Nebraska.

Like I said, "at least some mention of a bowl game too". Doesn't have to be Nebraska, and it doesn't have to be a Consolation Bowl game.

Just thinking that if Michigan accomplished everything on his list, only to come up short in their bowl game...it was mostly all for naught. Michigan is a big enough program that setting the national title as their goal ought to be right there at the top of their agenda, especially with the way they've started this season.

Posted: **Mon Oct 02, 2006 7:00 pm**

L45B wrote:

Thank you...

Posted: **Mon Oct 02, 2006 7:25 pm**

Flippin' mosquitoes.

Posted: **Mon Oct 02, 2006 7:52 pm**

Van wrote:
Mr T wrote:
Van wrote:BR, shouldn't your sig also include something about Nebraska, or at least some mention of a bowl game too?
I dont think BlindRef hopes to play a BigXII north team in a bowl game.....

Michigan would have to tank the second part of the season to play Nebraska.
Like I said, "at least some mention of a bowl game too". Doesn't have to be Nebraska, and it doesn't have to be a Consolation Bowl game.

Just thinking that if Michigan accomplished everything on his list, only to come up short in their bowl game...it was mostly all for naught. Michigan is a big enough program that setting the national title as their goal ought to be right there at the top of their agenda, especially with the way they've started this season.

I am setting my goals based on importance. Winning bowl games don't mean as much to me as beating Ohio State or Notre Dame.

I am not Shoalzie....I am a more traditional Michigan fan. I like Big Ten titles bowl games are fun, but they just don't do that much for me.

Posted: **Mon Oct 02, 2006 8:38 pm**

^^^^^^

So says someone whose team hasn't played in the BCS for the MNC.

Posted: **Mon Oct 02, 2006 8:52 pm**

That's not entirely true. Michigan fan loves when his team goes to the Rose Bowl. Ahhh, the pageantry. Ahhh, the echoes of Hail To the Victors in that beautiful stadium against a Pac-10 foe. Ahhh, the fancy Rose Bowl patch they get to wear on their uniforms. Ahhh, the favorite things of a typical UM fan.

That classic old school mindset is thankfully still fully engrained in most of their noggins.

Posted: **Mon Oct 02, 2006 9:59 pm**

I am not going to be ashamed of any of that.

I love the tradition of college football...the MNC is annoying and hasn't proven or fixed anything.

Posted: **Mon Oct 02, 2006 10:31 pm**

MgoBlue-LightSpecial wrote:State's just one of those programs that will have to continue cycling through coaches until they find their guy.

They had him in Nick Saban...unfortunately State was a "stepping stone"program and not a destination for top-notch coaches.

Posted: **Mon Oct 02, 2006 10:48 pm**

WolverineSteve wrote:
MgoBlue-LightSpecial wrote:State's just one of those programs that will have to continue cycling through coaches until they find their guy.
They had him in Nick Saban...unfortunately State was a "stepping stone"program and not a destination for top-notch coaches.

Debatable. They were a .500 team 4 of the 5 years he was there (even though he had to spend some time cleaning up after Perles's messes). Give any guy 5 years, and he can probably find a way to pull a 9 win season out of his ass - which is what Saban did in his final year prior to bolting for LSU...which was a fucking gift handed to him on a silver platter. Anyone would've left for that job.

The problem with Saban was he wasn't going to stay around at any college program. He had the NFL in mind well before taking the LSU job. He used LSU as the solidifying stepping stone to get to the NFL. His success there erased any doubts NFL gms might have had about the guy prior to.

Posted: **Mon Oct 02, 2006 10:51 pm**

So instead you guys give nobody 5 years and are a laughing stock... solid choice. I would think the MSU brass would love a 9 win season, no matter what orifice produced it.

Posted: **Mon Oct 02, 2006 10:55 pm**

L45B wrote:That's not entirely true. Michigan fan loves when his team goes to the Rose Bowl. Ahhh, the pageantry. Ahhh, the echoes of Hail To the Victors in that beautiful stadium against a Pac-10 foe. Ahhh, the fancy Rose Bowl patch they get to wear on their uniforms. Ahhh, getting shit on by the Pac 10 champ. Ahhh, the favorite things of a typical UM fan.

Posted: **Mon Oct 02, 2006 11:01 pm**

WolverineSteve wrote:So instead you guys give nobody 5 years and are a laughing stock... solid choice. I would think the MSU brass would love a 9 win season, no matter what orifice produced it.

Huh? John L will have been given at least 4 years, and the full 5 if he doesn't step down or get fired at the end of the season.

Obviously you want to give a guy some time to right the ship, but when you go out and lose games in epic meltdown fashion time after time, lose games to the conference's worst teams, can't control your own players, and rake everybody over the coals in your post game pressers, then it's probably time for the powers that be to say "all deals are off" and begin the search again.

And yeah, a 9 win season sounds good, at this point. But like I said, had we really wanted Saban to stick around or not is moot. He was going to bolt outta E. Lansing regardless. Just like he would've left USC, ND, or Ohio St. His eyes were set on the NFL.

Posted: **Mon Oct 02, 2006 11:07 pm**

Do you think if MSU matched LSU's offer he would have stayed? At the time he had State on the rise and LSU wasn't doing well at all. I truly think that was a defining moment for the program. What made the LSU job so attractive that State could not have kept him. Fuck he bolted before the bowl game. Top college coaches are routinely sought after by other programs and/or the NFL. The elite schools, or those who wish to get there manage to keep their guys.

Posted: **Mon Oct 02, 2006 11:15 pm**

WolverineSteve wrote:Do you think if MSU matched LSU's offer he would have stayed? At the time he had State on the rise and LSU wasn't doing well at all. I truly think that was a defining moment for the program. What made the LSU job so attractive that State could not have kept him. Fuck he bolted before the bowl game. Top college coaches are routinely sought after by other programs and/or the NFL. The elite schools, or those who wish to get there manage to keep their guys.

Saban couldn't handle playing second fiddle to Michigan. He's an ego maniac, and I believe would've bolted even had MSU matched the offer. All things being equal salary wise, LSU is definitely a better gig.

Posted: **Mon Oct 02, 2006 11:21 pm**

[not trying to start shit at all...really wondering]

So what's the answer? A young up and comer to make the program his own? A grizzled veteran looking to take a new team to the top? A NFL coach (ala Carrol) or a stud NFL coodinator (ala Perles)? Who's an upgrade? Bobby was a far cry from Nick, John L. is a basket case, if it were up to you, where do you go from here?

Posted: **Mon Oct 02, 2006 11:42 pm**

They need to find a guy who has proven it at a D1, major conference level, but at the same time, be able to sniff out the "stepping stoners" from the guys who really want to committ themselves to the program. The candidate has to understand that at best, his team will still only be #2 in his home state. You're asking a guy to go out and win Big Ten titles when he has to compete against Michigan in recruiting battles in his own backyard? That's all kinds of pressure. The bad coaches will be exposed quickly, and the good coaches will bolt once their stock rises. Tough situation. I'd like to see how Greg Schiano finishes at Rutgers this season. He seems like the tough nosed, all-business kinda guy State needs. Plus, I like that he's a defensive-minded guy. Kinda somethin' State could use.

But yeah, I am pretty much certain that John L will be done after 06. After Bobby Williams made similar comments to the media, that's when Ron Mason said it was time for him to go. John L, it appears, will go out the same way.

Posted: **Tue Oct 03, 2006 8:53 pm**

Mgo,

I was thinking about this the other day and also concluded that Schiano might be a good fit for you guys. He's in position to get some big-time offers.

The problem, as I see it, is that it might not be the right fit for him. The Big East's recent realignment created a void which Rutgers has been able to help fill, and it might very well be that Rutgers is on its way to becoming a premier program. From an historical standpoint, of course, Rutgers can't hold a candle to Michigan State, but that may very well change going forward (you yourself have conceded that Michigan State is only the #2 school in its own state).

Schiano also is (reportedly) under serious consideration for the Miami job, and strictly on comparison between the potential of the two programs, that might be more attractive than Michigan State, although Miami's image undoubtedly would rub many the wrong way.

Another guy with head coaching experience who deserves a possible look would be Paul Johnson. He's been able to win at Navy -- Navy -- although admittedly, in part, he's been the beneficiary of some incredibly weak schedules in recent years. I think some teams have shied away from him out of perception that he's wedded to the option offense, but I think he uses it because it gives him his best chance to win with the talent level he can get at Navy.

In any event, I agree with you that it's time for John LL to go. I'm beginning to wonder if he doesn't have some serious mental health issues. Even if he doesn't, your program has been nothing if not schizophrenic the last few years. You need a coach who can keep it on as even a keel as possible. By contrast, it's quite clear that John LL only aggravates its existing tendencies.

Posted: **Thu Oct 05, 2006 3:24 am**

BlindRef wrote:I am not Shoalzie....I am a more traditional Michigan fan. I like Big Ten titles bowl games are fun, but they just don't do that much for me.

'

I love Michigan football and the college game in general...I just detest the BCS, the unnecessary number of bowl games and how meaningless they are and the class system among the conferences in D-1. I complain about the state of college football more than I do about Michigan's program. Going 7-5 last year is no different than going 9-2 or even 10-1 any other year...you aren't playing for a national title and I don't get the same satisifaction as some would out of just making a bowl game. Fans of Michigan and any other major program should go into each season hoping/expecting a perfect season but given the system we're in...you can lose a game, win your conference and not really play for much in the bowl season other than a New Year's Day game and a paycheck. If under a playoff system with no bowls...it's more of a cut and dry deal with the success of a team's season. If you win your conference or post a top 10 record, you're probably getting a chance to play for the big prize. If not, you belong on the sideline with no silly parting gifts (ie--playing in a bowl game in Boise, El Paso, Tampa, etc.).

Posted: **Thu Oct 05, 2006 4:24 am**

Shoalz, if you can't understand the future/following season benefits of going 10-1, versus 7-5, then you're a complete dumbfuck.

Wake the fuck up.

Posted: **Thu Oct 05, 2006 12:08 pm**

MgoBlue-LightSpecial wrote:Shoalz, if you can't understand the future/following season benefits of going 10-1, versus 7-5, then you're a complete dumbfuck.

Wake the fuck up.

Maybe it means more for a Michigan State to finish 10-1 instead of 7-5 but Michigan will be Michigan as long as they don't become...well Michigan State. Look, they aren't trying to recruit me to play for them by their play...I want them to win it all every year. National powers need to post strong records to stay in the forefront. Considering Michigan hasn't had a 5 loss season in quite a while, I don't see last year bringing down the program. Do it for several years in a row and then you have problems. If I had the choice, of course I'd want Michigan win 10 games and beat their rivals every year instead of hovering around .500 and become irrelevent or the subject of ridicule.

I know I can't possibly be a good fan since I hope for success every year and don't tolerate breaking the rules in the process...geez, I've got my priorities all out of whack. Why don't I just support mediocrity and act like I'm better than everyone else for doing it.

Posted: **Thu Oct 05, 2006 5:02 pm**

Shoalzie wrote:Maybe it means more for a Michigan State to finish 10-1 instead of 7-5

We're not currently accepting applications for m2's replacement. Knock it off with the stupid.

Bro, a 10-1 (versus a 7-5) season would mean more to ANY program. We're talking USC, OSU, Texas, Florida, LSU, etc. All of them.

If I had the choice, of course I'd want Michigan win 10 games and beat their rivals every year instead of hovering around .500 and become irrelevent or the subject of ridicule.

Nice backpedal. If you're going to play the "there's no difference" card, at least stick to your fucking guns. If there's "no difference" between a 7-5 season and 10-1 season, then it shouldn't matter to you which record they're putting up.

National powers need to post strong records to stay in the forefront

Uhh, exactly, which is why a 10-1 season is much more beneficial than a 7-5 season. A team which finishes its season at 10-1 will be (almost every time) ranked higher at the start of the following season, than would a 7-5 team. Poll positioning is HUGE in CF, and starting the season in the top 5, top 10 is crucial, if you want to win that MNC. 1 loss teams will be giving themselves excellent starting positions the following year. 5 loss teams generally won't.

Posted: **Thu Oct 05, 2006 6:23 pm**

I say there's not much difference between 7-5 and 10-1 from the context that neither record will win you a national title with either mark. If you get down to the nitty-gritty...yes, losing 5 games instead of losing just 1 game is different. I just look at it from the context that during the season, when a team loses and is essentially knocked out of the title chase...losing a 2nd, 3rd, or 4th game isn't any more heartbreaking. If you're a fan that takes consolation in a bowl game...than you worry about the record after that. I'm two different fans during the season...while the Wolverines are undefeated and after their first loss. I just look at things differently once Michigan gets that first loss. I don't want to see them lose 4 or 5 games after that but once they lose that first game and are eliminated from playing in the only bowl game with importance, that's why there isn't too much of a difference between 7-5 and 10-1.

Posted: **Thu Oct 05, 2006 9:03 pm**

Shoalzie wrote:I say there's not much difference between 7-5 and 10-1 from the context that neither record will win you a national title with either mark.

So you're telling me that even had the one loss FSU team beaten OU in the 2000 BCS title game, they wouldn't have been awarded the championship?

You're struggling, bro.

Posted: **Fri Oct 06, 2006 3:52 pm**

MgoBlue-LightSpecial wrote:
Shoalzie wrote:I say there's not much difference between 7-5 and 10-1 from the context that neither record will win you a national title with either mark.
So you're telling me that even had the one loss FSU team beaten OU in the 2000 BCS title game, they wouldn't have been awarded the championship?

You're struggling, bro.

Weeeeeell, it's not a law that all 1 loss teams can't win it all. When you lose a second game, you're pretty much dead...unless you're going to find me a team that won a title with 2 losses. You enjoy shooting holes in my arguments so have at it...

Posted: **Fri Oct 06, 2006 5:28 pm**

Of course it's not a "law," but when you say a one loss team has the same shot as a five loss team, then you're implying that it's impossible.

Because surely it's impossible for a 5 loss team to get to the BCS title game.

You enjoy shooting holes in my arguments so have at it...

Hey, you can do things to prevent the stupid from coming out. You have the control, and it rests entirely in your fingertips.

Posted: **Fri Oct 06, 2006 5:35 pm**

I think you're just here to keep me in check...not too many take me to task with what I have to say....well, unless it goes outside of the realm of sports. I'm not that radical of a person...most of my mistakes are factual errors since there's no such thing as a right or wrong opinion...just opinions that are either well-thought out or reactionary and brainless. Hopefully, I fall more into column A than column B.

Damn MLB for putting the Tigers game at the same time as Michigan-MSU. :x

Posted: **Fri Oct 06, 2006 5:41 pm**

MgoBlue-LightSpecial wrote:Because surely it's impossible for a 5 loss team to get to the BCS title game.

Unless, of course, it's Cal.

Hey Shoalzie....ever heard of the aspect of CFB known as "recruiting?"

You should research the subject, and then probably stop with the stupid.

Posted: **Fri Oct 06, 2006 6:28 pm**

Plus, Notre Dame only needs to win 3 games to get a BCS birth, along with a check for $43 billion.

Posted: **Fri Oct 06, 2006 7:10 pm**

We did it with 4 losses last year!

Sin,

FSU

They played in the Orange Bowl against PSU as a 4 loss team...just sayin'

Posted: **Fri Oct 06, 2006 8:04 pm**

MgoBlue-LightSpecial wrote:Because surely it's impossible for a 5 loss team to get to the BCS title game.

Emphasis placed on the key words for the intellectually-impaired.

Posted: **Fri Oct 06, 2006 8:05 pm**

buckeye_in_sc wrote:They played in the Orange Bowl against PSU as a 4 loss team...just sayin'

Try upgrading your reading comprehension skills.

...just sayin'

Posted: **Fri Oct 06, 2006 8:55 pm**

He's a Buckeye, what do you expect? :P

BTW, thanks for immortalizing me in your sig...I don't think I've had a sig-worthy quote before.

T1B

Michigan - Michigan State

Michigan - Michigan State