Online Now 3148

The Blue Board

We aren't just committed to college football; we're early enrolling in it.

On this Board 1974
Record: 7394 (2/14/2012)

Online now 2341
Record: 18710 (2/25/2012)

Boards ▾

The Blue Board

We aren't just committed to college football; we're early enrolling in it.

247Rumors

College football scuttlebutt and scoop- powered by Football Rumor Mill

The Green Board

Where the madness isn't just in March.

Big Ten Board (Beta)

Reply

The Official Michigan, MSU, and 1 Random Guy from Arky Thread

  • Good priorities brah.

    signature image signature image signature image

    Hoffelcopter ●

  • SpartanRocky said...

    6 straight Ls, 2002-2007.

    We could just deal with it in terms of head to head Ws between MD and Hoke. 1-0 MD.

    That seems reasonable.
    Bo, Mo, and Lloyd also started out 0-1 vs MSU.
    After that....well, you know.

    signature image signature image signature image

    MSU isn't a very good football program.. takes year of consistent winning to get to that level. - copemoney 1/22/13

    Due51 ●

  • Due51 said...

    That seems reasonable.
    Bo, Mo, and Lloyd also started out 0-1 vs MSU.
    After that....well, you know.

    Keep living in the history brah.

    /Spartan'd

    signature image signature image signature image

    Hoffelcopter ●

  • Hoffelcopter said...

    1st Place Legends Division gets you what? A Non-BCS bowl? Congratulations on your victory?

    It gets us one spot above the second place team. When you beat that second place teams ass by two touchdowns it's even better

    signature image signature image signature image

    DWags ●

  • SpartanRocky said...

    About a year ago, I said that MSU's best days were ahead, rather than behind it. I pointed out that although MSU won the Big 10 in 2010, they did not do so with a roster full of the top talent. In particular, the OL consisted of 1 3-star and 4 2-stars, the DL was nothing but 3-stars, and the secondary had 2 3-stars and 2 2-stars in it. I said the starters in '11 would be, as a whole, more talented than the 2010 starters.

    With that in mind, I invite all the UM fans to compare my quoted post, detailing the '11 starters to the list below, the projected '12 starters. If stars matter as much as you say, doesn't it stand to reason that MSU could be even better in '12 than in '11? For convenience, I've put the former starter's name and star ranking next to the new guy's.

    Offense

    QB: Andrew Maxwell - 4 star (Up from Cousin's 3-star) RB: Bell - 2 star FB: Palazetti - 2 star (no change from Anderson's walk-on) WR: Arnett - 4 star (Up from Cunningham's 3-star) WR: Burbridge - 4 star (Up from Martin's 3-star) TE: Sims - 4 star (Up from Linthicum's 3-star) LT: France - 3 star LG: Treadwell - 4 star (Up from Foreman's 2-star) C: Jackson - 3 star RG: McDonald - 3 star RT: Fonoti - 3 star (Burkland, 4-star is going to challenge for both OT spots, but I won't put him as a starter till he actually passes the other guys)

    Defense

    SDE: Gholston - 5 star DT: Kittredge - 3 star (No change from 3-star Worthy. 4-star RS FR Brandon Clemons will challenge, but same with Burkland, not putting him as a starter) NT: White - 3 star WDE: Rush - 3 star (Hoover will challenge here, but he's a 3-star so no difference) WILL: Norman - 4 star MIKE: Bullough - 4 star SAM: Allen - 3-star BCB: Dennard - 2 star FS: Drummond (3-star)/Jones (3-star)/Cox (4-star)/Dixon (3-star)/Hicks (3-star). I'll call it a 3-star spot for now, in favor of the law of averages SS: Lewis - 4 star FCB: Adams 3 star

    Total: 1 5-star, 8 4-stars, 10 3-stars, 3 2-stars

    Thoughts?

    I just have to laugh. Rocky do you honestly believe Dantonio can make up the ground on coaches like Saban, Miles, Meyer, etc... if they are consistently getting much better talent? I don't. If you let those type of coaches start that far ahead of you talent wise you won't compete. Hoke has showed he can coach and i believe he will show he is on the same level coaching wise as those guys. Give him top 5 to top 10 talent and Michigan will put out elite level teams that can compete with the best the SEC has to offer.

    As far as MSU's team next year. Lack to much experience for me to believe they will be a better team than they were this past year.

    signature image signature image signature image

    WillyWolverine ●

  • SpartanRocky said...

    About a year ago, I said that MSU's best days were ahead, rather than behind it. I pointed out that although MSU won the Big 10 in 2010, they did not do so with a roster full of the top talent. In particular, the OL consisted of 1 3-star and 4 2-stars, the DL was nothing but 3-stars, and the secondary had 2 3-stars and 2 2-stars in it. I said the starters in '11 would be, as a whole, more talented than the 2010 starters.

    With that in mind, I invite all the UM fans to compare my quoted post, detailing the '11 starters to the list below, the projected '12 starters. If stars matter as much as you say, doesn't it stand to reason that MSU could be even better in '12 than in '11? For convenience, I've put the former starter's name and star ranking next to the new guy's.

    Offense

    QB: Andrew Maxwell - 4 star (Up from Cousin's 3-star) RB: Bell - 2 star FB: Palazetti - 2 star (no change from Anderson's walk-on) WR: Arnett - 4 star (Up from Cunningham's 3-star) WR: Burbridge - 4 star (Up from Martin's 3-star) TE: Sims - 4 star (Up from Linthicum's 3-star) LT: France - 3 star LG: Treadwell - 4 star (Up from Foreman's 2-star) C: Jackson - 3 star RG: McDonald - 3 star RT: Fonoti - 3 star (Burkland, 4-star is going to challenge for both OT spots, but I won't put him as a starter till he actually passes the other guys)

    Defense

    SDE: Gholston - 5 star DT: Kittredge - 3 star (No change from 3-star Worthy. 4-star RS FR Brandon Clemons will challenge, but same with Burkland, not putting him as a starter) NT: White - 3 star WDE: Rush - 3 star (Hoover will challenge here, but he's a 3-star so no difference) WILL: Norman - 4 star MIKE: Bullough - 4 star SAM: Allen - 3-star BCB: Dennard - 2 star FS: Drummond (3-star)/Jones (3-star)/Cox (4-star)/Dixon (3-star)/Hicks (3-star). I'll call it a 3-star spot for now, in favor of the law of averages SS: Lewis - 4 star FCB: Adams 3 star

    Total: 1 5-star, 8 4-stars, 10 3-stars, 3 2-stars

    Thoughts?

    I think MSU will reap the last couple years of recruiting for awhile, especially because of the flexibility afforded by the red-shirts.

    But, two deeps invariably include newer classes, so each year after this one State will get a little bit weaker. I mean, what happens if Burbridge/Sims don't get their acts together off the field? What happens when Gholston goes pro? What happens if Maxwell struggles? What happens if a guy you project struggles? (For example, Maxwell is not an improvement in stars over Nichol, who couldn't win the job).

    You have to keep the bench filled with talented players. It is now at MSU because of the 2009-2010 recruiting classes that got the "Rich Rod Bump", but will it be 2 or more years from now?

    Peterklima

  • Hoffelcopter said...

    roflmao

    Recruits seem to think otherwise.

    I think it's really funny that a lot of the elite recruits (who are choosing UM wayyy over MSU) all bring up the Sugar Bowl as a great win and sign of improvement that we won a BCS game. And MSU fans just keep telling us how awful it was. Well they can think what they want, as long as the recruits liked it.

    signature image signature image signature image

    Ducksworth

  • SpartanRocky said...

    You guys absolutely dominated MSU when the talent disparity was enormous. You guys seem to think that your current recruiting will return the rivalry to that level of disparity. Though MSU is not equaling UM in recruiting currently, it's the relative distance between the two rosters that's changed, and not in favor of UM.

    I can only speak for myself, but I think I have tried to be consistent in saying numerous times that the years of UM dominating MSU are over.

    Big M

  • SpartanRocky said...

    No, but he did take a non-AQ into an AQ conference and win with them.

    I would seriously be interested to find out who is better at "coaching up" lesser talent.

    Peterklima

  • Maize&Blue said...

    As far as MSU's team next year. Lack to much experience for me to believe they will be a better team than they were this past year.

    If you can't score on em you can't beat em Best would be a tie after a really long game

    signature image signature image signature image

    DWags ●

  • Peterklima said...

    I would seriously be interested to find out who is better at "coaching up" lesser talent.

    Not me. I'm more interested in who's better at coaching higher talent. SR just pointed out that State's roster has more collective stars than it's had in maybe ever. Michigan has a Top 10 class and looks to be equaling that for 2013. I want to see who can turn that talent into dominance.

    signature image signature image signature image

    MSU isn't a very good football program.. takes year of consistent winning to get to that level. - copemoney 1/22/13

    Due51 ●

  • For all the talk of the bcs bowl victory not meaning much there's been a ton of recruits who have mentioned it at as a reason why they believe we are back. That's really all that matters. It's exactly why making and winning bcs games matters. It's all about perception and ours is on the rise. We'll see if it translates into victories.

    Ok, everyone can go back to mindlessly arguing about the same things they have for 400 pages.

    jimtaco

  • Maize&Blue said...

    I just have to laugh. Rocky do you honestly believe Dantonio can make up the ground on coaches like Saban, Miles, Meyer, etc... if they are consistently getting much better talent? I don't. If you let those type of coaches start that far ahead of you talent wise you won't compete. Hoke has showed he can coach and i believe he will show he is on the same level coaching wise as those guys. Give him top 5 to top 10 talent and Michigan will put out elite level teams that can compete with the best the SEC has to offer.

    As far as MSU's team next year. Lack to much experience for me to believe they will be a better team than they were this past year.

    Who's trying to compete with those guys? State's a ways aways from being able to pull Bama/LSU/tOSU talent. As several of your fellow fans have pointed out, MSU hasn't made a BCS bowl yet. I'm not talking NCs for MSU.

    State needs to have talent sufficient to compete for Big 10 titles. I think they have that; they've competed for the past 2 with "inferior" talent to the projected starters in '12.

    It'll take a lot of winning seasons, probably a decade's worth, for MSU to start to build the recruiting clout that those other programs have. I don't think you get there with a roster of mostly 2-stars. However, other than UM and tOSU, I don't think the other Big 10 programs have anything close to a decisive talent advantage over MSU (recruiting rankings only).

    Look, I'm not going to tell you that the last 4 years means that MSU football is now the equal of UM football historically. Overall, however, it does mean that MSU is climbing the ranks in the conference. The last 2 years weren't flukes, and though I doubt MSU is winning 10+ games/year regularly, I don't think a return to 6-6/5-7 is in order either.

    UM already has their program. MSU is building theirs. I don't have an issue with UM recruiting well, because that's what their program does. What I do have an issue with is that UM fans assume that as soon as UM gets good, MSU is going to fall hard. I just don't see that happening.

    Michigan State does not and will not run the 3-4 defense.

    SpartanRocky

  • Peterklima said...

    I would seriously be interested to find out who is better at "coaching up" lesser talent.

    Give it 4 more years and you'll have an answer

    Or you'll say maybe ratings are crap.

    This post was edited by DWags on 2/20/2012 at 3:12 PM

    signature image signature image signature image

    DWags ●

  • Peterklima said...

    I think MSU will reap the last couple years of recruiting for awhile, especially because of the flexibility afforded by the red-shirts.

    But, two deeps invariably include newer classes, so each year after this one State will get a little bit weaker. I mean, what happens if Burbridge/Sims don't get their acts together off the field? What happens when Gholston goes pro? What happens if Maxwell struggles? What happens if a guy you project struggles? (For example, Maxwell is not an improvement in stars over Nichol, who couldn't win the job).

    You have to keep the bench filled with talented players. It is now at MSU because of the 2009-2010 recruiting classes that got the "Rich Rod Bump", but will it be 2 or more years from now?

    Or could these next few years give MSU enough recruiting clout to begin to pull in higher ranked classes? I don't know, but if State has a 3rd straight 10+ W season in a row (I doubt that happens this year, I'll be thrilled with 9-3) I think that won't hurt recruiting.

    Michigan State does not and will not run the 3-4 defense.

    SpartanRocky

  • Big M said...

    I can only speak for myself, but I think I have tried to be consistent in saying numerous times that the years of UM dominating MSU are over.

    Personally, I have a hard time beleiving the "years of UM dominating MSU are over" and here is my rational:

    1. Dantonio and MSU have thrived while UM (and to a lesser degree OSU) fell off. Whether they can beat UM in the future remains to be seen. Anyway, all else being equal, it would not be surprising to see Hoke win 2/3rds or 3/4ths of the games once he has his recruits and MSU's roster is a little depleted from battling OSU/UM on the recruiting trail. Not sure that is "domination" though.

    2. We all saw RichRod get "dominated" by the entire B10 despite having the "name brand" of Michigan to pull in good recruits. MSU is not a coaching destination (as Saban proved) and it just can't afford to pay on the same level for new coaches. Dantonio is not a typical coach who is good enough to win, but not good enough to be considered for higher positions. They would have to hit a "home run" in a new coaching search to keep up with a (presumedly) resurgant Michigan.

    3. Given the rest economic exodus, the state of Michigan might not be able to sully support (through recruits, patrons, etc.) two big-time football programs for very long. Which one do you think will feel the pinch, while the other will be kept afloat based on national perception?

    So, there are at least some reason to believe Michigan can return to dominating MSU, if Hoke turns out to be a good coach over the years. Also, there is reason to believe that, if Hoke fails miserably and UM screws up the search for another coach, that MSU could "dominate" Michigan like they did under RichRod.

    Peterklima

  • Hoffelcopter said...

    Cool, bragging rights. We still get bragging rights of a BCS Bowl win, you guys ever have that?

    If you would like to brag about your Sugar Bowl win...here's a link...

    HokieScoop.com I Virginia Tech Football and Recruiting

    http://virginiatech.247sports.com/

    virginiatech.247sports.com

    NigelUno

  • SpartanRocky said...

    Who's trying to compete with those guys? State's a ways aways from being able to pull Bama/LSU/tOSU talent. As several of your fellow fans have pointed out, MSU hasn't made a BCS bowl yet. I'm not talking NCs for MSU.

    State needs to have talent sufficient to compete for Big 10 titles. I think they have that; they've competed for the past 2 with "inferior" talent to the projected starters in '12.

    It'll take a lot of winning seasons, probably a decade's worth, for MSU to start to build the recruiting clout that those other programs have. I don't think you get there with a roster of mostly 2-stars. However, other than UM and tOSU, I don't think the other Big 10 programs have anything close to a decisive talent advantage over MSU (recruiting rankings only).

    Look, I'm not going to tell you that the last 4 years means that MSU football is now the equal of UM football historically. Overall, however, it does mean that MSU is climbing the ranks in the conference. The last 2 years weren't flukes, and though I doubt MSU is winning 10+ games/year regularly, I don't think a return to 6-6/5-7 is in order either.

    UM already has their program. MSU is building theirs. I don't have an issue with UM recruiting well, because that's what their program does. What I do have an issue with is that UM fans assume that as soon as UM gets good, MSU is going to fall hard. I just don't see that happening.

    So then recruiting matters. I don't really care if MSU falls hard. I care about Michigan being elite. I feel like we are on that track with our coaching staff and the way we are recruiting. I also believe that if MSU's recruiting doesn't pick up Michigan will begin to win a majority of the games again.

    signature image signature image signature image

    WillyWolverine ●

  • jimtaco said...

    For all the talk of the bcs bowl victory not meaning much there's been a ton of recruits who have mentioned it at as a reason why they believe we are back. That's really all that matters. It's exactly why making and winning bcs games matters. It's all about perception and ours is on the rise. We'll see if it translates into victories.

    Ok, everyone can go back to mindlessly arguing about the same things they have for 400 pages.

    So were they part of the 5 thousand or so who watched on tv? Cool

    signature image signature image signature image

    DWags ●

  • SpartanRocky said...

    Or could these next few years give MSU enough recruiting clout to begin to pull in higher ranked classes? I don't know, but if State has a 3rd straight 10+ W season in a row (I doubt that happens this year, I'll be thrilled with 9-3) I think that won't hurt recruiting.

    I dunno. I think Enos leaving has really hurt MSU. Hell even Dorsey is saying MSU needs better recruiters. As MSU fans trumpet every freaking day, MSU has won 22 games the last 2 years, and recruiting basically looks identical to 2010.

    Big M

  • SpartanRocky said...

    Or could these next few years give MSU enough recruiting clout to begin to pull in higher ranked classes? I don't know, but if State has a 3rd straight 10+ W season in a row (I doubt that happens this year, I'll be thrilled with 9-3) I think that won't hurt recruiting.

    Your point makes sense, but it makes me think of Wisco. They have been better and better longer than MSU, yet they still struggle to improve their recruiting.

    I think it will take more than 10+ win seasons to build the name recognition needed to improve recruiting.

    I really do think you need "big national games" to get your success out there. I know that sounds "homerish" but I think the reason UM recruits so well is all the publicity from Rose Bowls, national championships and even national championship discussions,etc. Then it just takes a life on of itself (i.e., more guys go NFL, more exposure, better players, better games and more exposure). For example, the ratings for the UM/OSU game were higher than the B10 championship game this year - despite being played at noon, up against other games and involving a 6-6 team and two teams that could not even win their division/conference. Those ratings were not created by Brady Hoke, but by decades of Bo, Moeller, Carr....

    Not sure there is a magic formula, but I think MSU has to do more than Wisco has done (multiple B10 titles, but losses in the big games).

    This post was edited by Peterklima on 2/20/2012 at 3:20 PM

    Peterklima

  • Back to the Future IV:

    Marty - It is so frustrating being a Michigan fan right now. I can't handle losing to Michigan State 4 years in a row.
    Doc - I'll set the year for 1970. You can go back to the good old days.

    attachment

    NigelUno

  • Maize&Blue said...

    So then recruiting matters. I don't really care if MSU falls hard. I care about Michigan being elite. I feel like we are on that track with our coaching staff and the way we are recruiting. I also believe that if MSU's recruiting doesn't pick up Michigan will begin to win a majority of the games again.

    I agree with this wholeheartedly.

    xxmgobluexx ●

  • Spartanrocky must get tired of being the only State fan in this thread capable of having a rational discussion.

    Upvotes to you.

    jimtaco

  • You appear to have severe Alzheimer's, restricting your memory to a period of just 4 years. This is sad.

    FilthySanchez

Football Recruiting
Basketball Recruiting
Features
Resources
Connect

247Sports In partnership with CBS Sports