Online Now 2554

MSU Red Cedar Message Board

The largest and most active MSU Spartans board on the web

On this Board 1719
Record: 12118 (3/18/2012)

Online now 2411
Record: 10351 (3/11/2012)

Boards ▾

MSU Red Cedar Message Board

The largest and most active MSU Spartans board on the web

The Press Box

The place to ask questions to SpartanTailgate's recruiting experts

Duffy Daugherty Forum

"The Duff" is dedicated to Michigan State football recruiting discussion

Jack Breslin Forum

"The Bres" is dedicated to Michigan State basketball recruiting discussion

Wells Hall Off Topic Board

This is your pulpit to preach to the masses about everything from politics to religion

Marketplace & Ticket Exchange

The place to buy, trade or sell Michigan State tickets

Fantasy Sports Forum

For fantasy football and other fantasy sports discussion

Test/Feedback Forum

Reply

Do you want a very tough FB schedule?

  • dagomike said...

    I think the nine conference games is DOA.

    Yea, that got axed when the Pac-12 partnership came into being. Totally fine with that.

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

    SpartanRocky

  • RPMadMSU said...

    We had this discussion in length last summer so I'm not going to post a long response. But the current system based on perception, reputation and tradition makes it nearly impossible for 90% of all FBS programs to even make a final regardless of how good a team may or may not be. MSU is in that 90%. Even if a team like MSU last year wet undefeated it would've been almost impossible for them to go to the MNC. Naive/Ignorant voters or some strange computer calculation that takes pervious years results into consideration would have found away to get the matchup that we had.

    The system is flawed, and does not do anything but protect matchups tv exexcutives think we want to see. Because that's what I believe, I don't care to participate in it until it is fixed.

    That's all well and good from a philosophical point of view, but I'd rather not see MSU take that approach. FWIW, there's going to be a small play-off starting in the next few years anyways.

    I do believe that an undefeated MSU in 2011 would have played for the NC, if the rest of the season played out as it did. You know the formula: 0 L teams are put in front of 1L teams, etc. There was only 1 undefeated team last year (LSU) going into the NC game. If MSU was also undefeated, I have a hard time believing they would not be ranked #2.

    Sadly, perception matters, and there's a difference between going 10-2 vs. 9-3, or 9-3 instead of 8-4. MSU has finished the year ranked the past 2 years, and will start the 2012 season ranked somewhere in the top 20. That's a benefit conferred based on past performance, moving MSU closer to that 10% than 90% category. It's much easier to stay ranked, and therefore improve in the rankings, when you start the year ranked. All you have to do is keep winning games, and the voters will move you up automatically as teams in front of you lose.

    Do I like that? No. Is it reality? Yep.

    In that context, the risk of an L outweighs the reward of winning a big OOC game. This isn't basketball, where RPI matters and there's a tourney at the end. I'd prefer MSU maximize it's potential to win a N.C. under whatever rules are applicable. That means going undefeated, in this current climate. To me, that means an OOC that prepares MSU for the Big 10, with moderate to low risk of getting an L.

    Many folks disparage Wisky's non-conf. schedule (rightfully so), but the fact remains that just about everyone felt that an undefeated UW team plays LSU for the NC last year. No one really cares about OOC SOS, from a polls perspective, as long as you start the year ranked and don't lose.

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

    SpartanRocky

  • SpartanRocky said...

    That's all well and good from a philosophical point of view, but I'd rather not see MSU take that approach. FWIW, there's going to be a small play-off starting in the next few years anyways.

    I do believe that an undefeated MSU in 2011 would have played for the NC, if the rest of the season played out as it did. You know the formula: 0 L teams are put in front of 1L teams, etc. There was only 1 undefeated team last year (LSU) going into the NC game. If MSU was also undefeated, I have a hard time believing they would not be ranked #2.

    Sadly, perception matters, and there's a difference between going 10-2 vs. 9-3, or 9-3 instead of 8-4. MSU has finished the year ranked the past 2 years, and will start the 2012 season ranked somewhere in the top 20. That's a benefit conferred based on past performance, moving MSU closer to that 10% than 90% category. It's much easier to stay ranked, and therefore improve in the rankings, when you start the year ranked. All you have to do is keep winning games, and the voters will move you up automatically as teams in front of you lose.

    Do I like that? No. Is it reality? Yep.

    In that context, the risk of an L outweighs the reward of winning a big OOC game. This isn't basketball, where RPI matters and there's a tourney at the end. I'd prefer MSU maximize it's potential to win a N.C. under whatever rules are applicable. That means going undefeated, in this current climate. To me, that means an OOC that prepares MSU for the Big 10, with moderate to low risk of getting an L.

    Many folks disparage Wisky's non-conf. schedule (rightfully so), but the fact remains that just about everyone felt that an undefeated UW team plays LSU for the NC last year. No one really cares about OOC SOS, from a polls perspective, as long as you start the year ranked and don't lose.

    I don't think it would matter as much as you think. I understand that there will be a small playoff, but there needs to be a stop to the high benefits of cream puff scheduling that exists today. I thinks it's ruining college football...and the playoff systems being put out there now do nothing to stem it. The RPI system is limited in college football as well.

    If MSU scheduled a MAC team, 2 BCS conference opponents, and ND as their non-con, win or lose they'll get plenty of exposure...and the games will probably be better attended, more watched, more talked about, etc...then what we currently have...again, win or lose.

    FCS games should not count. Playing a challenging schedule should count.

    They need a combo system like Hockey/Basketball has that rewards teams for winning both conferencnce championship as well as playing and beating a tougher than normal non-con schedule.

    Wisconsin's failure to go undefeated the last 2 or so years is directly related to the fact that their schedule did not prep them for the B1G season.

    Losing to Cal in MD's second season probably prepped MSU for that Citrus Bowl run more than playing Youngstown State did last year. I'm not sure we lose at ND last year if we had challenged ourselves a little more before playing that game.

    This post has been edited 2 times, most recently by RPMadMSU on 5/7/2012 at 11:29 AM

    signature image

    RPMadMSU

  • SpartanRocky said...

    That's all well and good from a philosophical point of view, but I'd rather not see MSU take that approach. FWIW, there's going to be a small play-off starting in the next few years anyways.

    I do believe that an undefeated MSU in 2011 would have played for the NC, if the rest of the season played out as it did. You know the formula: 0 L teams are put in front of 1L teams, etc. There was only 1 undefeated team last year (LSU) going into the NC game. If MSU was also undefeated, I have a hard time believing they would not be ranked #2.

    Sadly, perception matters, and there's a difference between going 10-2 vs. 9-3, or 9-3 instead of 8-4. MSU has finished the year ranked the past 2 years, and will start the 2012 season ranked somewhere in the top 20. That's a benefit conferred based on past performance, moving MSU closer to that 10% than 90% category. It's much easier to stay ranked, and therefore improve in the rankings, when you start the year ranked. All you have to do is keep winning games, and the voters will move you up automatically as teams in front of you lose.

    Do I like that? No. Is it reality? Yep.

    In that context, the risk of an L outweighs the reward of winning a big OOC game. This isn't basketball, where RPI matters and there's a tourney at the end. I'd prefer MSU maximize it's potential to win a N.C. under whatever rules are applicable. That means going undefeated, in this current climate. To me, that means an OOC that prepares MSU for the Big 10, with moderate to low risk of getting an L.

    Many folks disparage Wisky's non-conf. schedule (rightfully so), but the fact remains that just about everyone felt that an undefeated UW team plays LSU for the NC last year. No one really cares about OOC SOS, from a polls perspective, as long as you start the year ranked and don't lose.

    Rocky, I think I've been on the same side of every issue with you so far...until now. :)

    Assume we just swap out a FAU laugher for an Alabama or Oregon-type game each year. Just one game. And even assume for a minute that its an automatic loss (but I will assume now that it will be a very competitive game win or lose). I think it shakes out like this:

    - OOC loss = zero negative impact on B1G season. Rose Bowl goal is not at all affected. A potential upside is that it gets the team a bit more ready for the B1G season. Playing FAU and Youngstown is worse than playing our scout team.

    - Marquis matchup early in the year is a guaranteed Gameday event with national coverage. I assume national exposure sells to recruits -- not just fans. Telling recruits we've got FAU and Youngstown state on the docket probably doesn't excite too much.

    - An EARLY season loss (esp. to a good team) can be overcome in the final standings. Assume the OOC loss; but we win the B1G and go to the Rose Bowl. Everyone will have forgotten the loss, including the pollsters. Ok. State had a catastrophic loss to Iowa State last year but had a large number of people voting for their inclusion in the NC.

    - We're not a major brand yet. As I said above, I liken us to a late-80s FSU trying to plant its flag in Florida which already had bigger programs to contend with. We need to do some aggressive things -- just sticking with the same old plan (e.g., play watered-down ND + a bunch of who-dats) won't suddenly give us national respect. It never has before, why would it change now?

    I fully acknowledge contrary arguments; there is a lot of sense in considering a ND + creampuff / regional MAC OOC schedule. I just think Hollis is right to think nothing will change unless we attack things aggressively, and that means playing on a national stage as often as we can. Recruits are fans too, and this can only help (caveat: so long as we are competitive with these teams and win at least half the time, and I'm confident that MD has us at that point).

    Tupes

  • TempleSpartan said...

    Somewhere in between...

    example:
    2014
    Oregon at home
    WMU away
    ND away
    South Florida home

    Ill take this schedule minus the away part of wmu. 1 mac. 1 big east. Nd. And big time. Works for me.

    blanch32

  • 82msuspartan said...

    I would say there is no penalty for playing a weak non conference schedule. Wisc and K St have been doing it for years and have built their programs reputations on those weak non conference schedule. Last year we really accomplished very little in the non conference season but it did not hurt our team or perceptions. When you look at it YSU, CMU and FAU were all pretty weak opponents and we did as we were supposed to do by winning those games. Even though we played one of our worst games of the season against ND in the end we came out of the non conf schedule pretty good poll wise and perception wise. So until they start penalizing teams for weak non conference scheds I see no reason to playing tougher non conf games. ND is enough for me. Play 3 light games to build depth and establish poll position going into the B1G. That formula worked well in 2010 and 2011.

    I agree. ND plays a four or five tough games during a season and the rest are pansies. Yet they have built a reputation that continues today even after a decade of mediocre seasons. We should be looking to build a long record of winning before we say bring em on to the likes of Alabama and Oregon.

    I remember the 1987 and it was always embarrassing getting smacked down on a national stage by ND(31-8) or Fl St (31-3) at home early in the season. We became all but irrelevant after that. Even with the rose bowl win. Having early embarrassing losses tainted the image of some good teams and some great players like Lo. White.

    Play ND or another similar team plus 3 easy wins.

    This post has been edited 3 times, most recently by lars on 5/7/2012 at 11:44 AM

    lars ●

  • blanch32 said...

    Ill take this schedule minus the away part of wmu. 1 mac. 1 big east. Nd. And big time. Works for me.

    I'd rather play WMU on the road before going on the road to play a BCS team with a new starting QB.

    Lets play or cream puffs on the road as much as possible. I'd rather save the home dates for as many real games as possible.

    signature image

    RPMadMSU

  • lars said...

    I agree. ND plays a four or five tough games during a season and the rest are pansies. Yet they have built a reputation that continues today even after a decade of mediocre seasons. We should be looking to build a long record of winning before we say bring em on to the likes of Alabama and Oregon.

    I remember the 1987 and it was always embarrassing getting smacked down on a national stage by ND(31-8) or Fl St (31-3) at home early in the season. We became all be irrelevant after that. Even with the rose bowl win. Having early embarrassing losses tainted the image of some good teams and some great players like Lo. White.

    Play ND or another similar team plus 3 easy wins.

    You think the Rose Bowl season was tainted more than 2010 where we missed the Rose Bowl on a technicality?

    Seriously???

    signature image

    RPMadMSU

  • SpartanRocky said...

    That's all well and good from a philosophical point of view, but I'd rather not see MSU take that approach. FWIW, there's going to be a small play-off starting in the next few years anyways.

    I do believe that an undefeated MSU in 2011 would have played for the NC, if the rest of the season played out as it did. You know the formula: 0 L teams are put in front of 1L teams, etc. There was only 1 undefeated team last year (LSU) going into the NC game. If MSU was also undefeated, I have a hard time believing they would not be ranked #2.

    Sadly, perception matters, and there's a difference between going 10-2 vs. 9-3, or 9-3 instead of 8-4. MSU has finished the year ranked the past 2 years, and will start the 2012 season ranked somewhere in the top 20. That's a benefit conferred based on past performance, moving MSU closer to that 10% than 90% category. It's much easier to stay ranked, and therefore improve in the rankings, when you start the year ranked. All you have to do is keep winning games, and the voters will move you up automatically as teams in front of you lose.

    Do I like that? No. Is it reality? Yep.

    In that context, the risk of an L outweighs the reward of winning a big OOC game. This isn't basketball, where RPI matters and there's a tourney at the end. I'd prefer MSU maximize it's potential to win a N.C. under whatever rules are applicable. That means going undefeated, in this current climate. To me, that means an OOC that prepares MSU for the Big 10, with moderate to low risk of getting an L.

    Many folks disparage Wisky's non-conf. schedule (rightfully so), but the fact remains that just about everyone felt that an undefeated UW team plays LSU for the NC last year. No one really cares about OOC SOS, from a polls perspective, as long as you start the year ranked and don't lose.

    but Rocky, if you're counting on an undefeated season to get us where we want to go, we should have an objective look at how often that happens. When did a B1G team go undefeated? Maybe OSU in 2002?
    I'd take it when it happens, but it is EXTREMELY difficult to go undefeated overall or even just in the conference slate, and that was before the championship game.

    How did LSU get to the championship game this year? Perceived strength of schedule, not a perfect record.
    So playing and beating more tough teams is an advantage.

    Diodotus ●

  • 82msuspartan said...

    I would say there is no penalty for playing a weak non conference schedule. Wisc and K St have been doing it for years and have built their programs reputations on those weak non conference schedule. Last year we really accomplished very little in the non conference season but it did not hurt our team or perceptions. When you look at it YSU, CMU and FAU were all pretty weak opponents and we did as we were supposed to do by winning those games. Even though we played one of our worst games of the season against ND in the end we came out of the non conf schedule pretty good poll wise and perception wise. So until they start penalizing teams for weak non conference scheds I see no reason to playing tougher non conf games. ND is enough for me. Play 3 light games to build depth and establish poll position going into the B1G. That formula worked well in 2010 and 2011.

    Conversely. Id argue the only reason we lost that nd gm was bc fl atl and young st flat out did not have us prepared.

    Look, last and 1999 are perfect examples of why we need to play in bigger gms. Despite dominating uofm both times and ending w the same record, we got passed over. Why? Perception. Only way we can change that is to do it on the field. Idaho state ain't going to cut it.

    blanch32

  • lars said...

    I agree. ND plays a four or five tough games during a season and the rest are pansies. Yet they have built a reputation that continues today even after a decade of mediocre seasons. We should be looking to build a long record of winning before we say bring em on to the likes of Alabama and Oregon.

    I remember the 1987 and it was always embarrassing getting smacked down on a national stage by ND(31-8) or Fl St (31-3) at home early in the season. We became all be irrelevant after that. Even with the rose bowl win. Having early embarrassing losses tainted the image of some good teams and some great players like Lo. White.

    Play ND or another similar team plus 3 easy wins.

    If your goal is to be the National Champion, beat ALL the teams on your schedule regardless of their quality.

    Schedule a couple of very good teams in the OOC and stick to decent programs for the "tune ups". If you cannot beat them, shut up about MNC until you can. I do not respect the Wisky approach of 4 OOC cupcakes.

    When the playoff system moves to the inevitable 8 or more team format, perception will matter less and the Anybody-Anywhere mentality will pay dividends.

    signature image signature image signature image

    --- --- "If you want to be the Man, then you have got to BE the Man." -- CA Sparty's Dad

    Misterray ●

  • lars said...

    Play ND or another similar team plus 3 easy wins.

    Three easy wins?

    THAT is tainted. Screw that.

    signature image signature image signature image

    --- --- "If you want to be the Man, then you have got to BE the Man." -- CA Sparty's Dad

    Misterray ●

  • ND
    CMU
    WMU
    EMU

    TPain151807

  • RPMadMSU said...

    You think the Rose Bowl season was tainted more than 2010 where we missed the Rose Bowl on a Delany/OSU screwjob?

    Seriously???

    fixed

    signature image signature image signature image

    --- --- "If you want to be the Man, then you have got to BE the Man." -- CA Sparty's Dad

    Misterray ●

  • Misterray said...

    fixed

    Fixed, but point stands!

    Thanks!

    signature image

    RPMadMSU

  • Im sick of people trumping up the wisconsin example. Look, for as wk as their schedule is, are they still playing in natty championship gm? Winning rose bowls? Hell, getting bcs at lg selections?

    Sorry folks, but that strat has tapped that program out, and I only expect them to fall from here. Hell, nds been following that same plan for a decade now and they still suck. Plus, its much better for dantonio to tell recruits the dennard story. Freshman thrown into the big time due to injury, and 2 picks in the cap bowl a yr later. Doubtful this would have happened if we feast on cupcakes.

    blanch32

  • blanch32 said...

    Im sick of people trumping up the wisconsin example. Look, for as wk as their schedule is, are they still playing in natty championship gm? Winning rose bowls? Hell, getting bcs at lg selections?

    Sorry folks, but that strat has tapped that program out, and I only expect them to fall from here. Hell, nds been following that same plan for a decade now and they still suck. Plus, its much better for dantonio to tell recruits the dennard story. Freshman thrown into the big time due to injury, and 2 picks in the cap bowl a yr later. Doubtful this would have happened if we feast on cupcakes.

    Outback Bowl

    Not Cap One bowl

    TPain151807

  • RPMadMSU said...

    I'd rather play WMU on the road before going on the road to play a BCS team with a new starting QB.

    Lets play or cream puffs on the road as much as possible. I'd rather save the home dates for as many real games as possible.

    Yea. Man did that cal gm back in 2009 suck!

    blanch32

  • To be competitive in BCS rankings you need to schedule cupcakes and run up 70 points on them. Wisky always gets ranked ahead of us for doing that every year, it's the reason they went to the Rose Bowl in 2010.

    Now with a PhD in Applied Llama Physics...

    Dr RedHotLlama ●

  • Dr. RedHotLlama said...

    To be competitive in BCS rankings you need to schedule cupcakes and run up 70 points on them. Wisky always gets ranked ahead of us for doing that every year, it's the reason they went to the Rose Bowl in 2010.

    actually we were ahead of them in the rankings until Wiskey ran up the score on Indiana.
    But the Big Ten championship games will make sure that will never be a problem again.

    Diodotus ●

  • Tupes said...

    Rocky, I think I've been on the same side of every issue with you so far...until now. :)

    Assume we just swap out a FAU laugher for an Alabama or Oregon-type game each year. Just one game. And even assume for a minute that its an automatic loss (but I will assume now that it will be a very competitive game win or lose). I think it shakes out like this:

    - OOC loss = zero negative impact on B1G season. Rose Bowl goal is not at all affected. A potential upside is that it gets the team a bit more ready for the B1G season. Playing FAU and Youngstown is worse than playing our scout team.

    - Marquis matchup early in the year is a guaranteed Gameday event with national coverage. I assume national exposure sells to recruits -- not just fans. Telling recruits we've got FAU and Youngstown state on the docket probably doesn't excite too much.

    - An EARLY season loss (esp. to a good team) can be overcome in the final standings. Assume the OOC loss; but we win the B1G and go to the Rose Bowl. Everyone will have forgotten the loss, including the pollsters. Ok. State had a catastrophic loss to Iowa State last year but had a large number of people voting for their inclusion in the NC.

    - We're not a major brand yet. As I said above, I liken us to a late-80s FSU trying to plant its flag in Florida which already had bigger programs to contend with. We need to do some aggressive things -- just sticking with the same old plan (e.g., play watered-down ND + a bunch of who-dats) won't suddenly give us national respect. It never has before, why would it change now?

    I fully acknowledge contrary arguments; there is a lot of sense in considering a ND + creampuff / regional MAC OOC schedule. I just think Hollis is right to think nothing will change unless we attack things aggressively, and that means playing on a national stage as often as we can. Recruits are fans too, and this can only help (caveat: so long as we are competitive with these teams and win at least half the time, and I'm confident that MD has us at that point).

    A few things.

    1. Early season OOC loss matters if you get obliterated. I don't think you need to automatically go after the top 5 to have a competitive OOC schedule. All that national coverage is not good unless MSU plays a good game or wins. This game, if it happens, cannot be the first or really 2nd game of the year. Tune-ups, though they don't make great viewing, are essential for a team to build some momentum and work out kinks.

    2. I don't like the view that it's Rose Bowl or bust. BCS bowls still have weight and an OOC L all but knocks you out of an at-large bid. If MSU is 11-1 going into the CCG, they're likely in the top 7 or so. See the pre-CCG rankings below. Losing to Wisky by 3 in the CCG is highly unlikely to drop MSU out of the top 14, and could have prevented Michigan from hitting that top 14 status. Recall that MSU did start the year ranked at #17. If, in theory, MSU is undefeated until the Nebraska game, State is sitting no worse than 8th, more likely 6th, instead of 11th. That 3-5 spot difference is what makes or breaks that year-end top 14 ranking, which means BCS eligibility.

    http://espn.go.com/college-football/rankings/_/week/14

    3. I don't want cream-puff central, but the benefit of a big OOC W is not equal to the harm an L, even to a great team, could do. Quite frankly this year's schedule is pretty darn great to me; a pair of good, but not elite OOC opponents with a pair of MAC teams in between. All the tough OOC games are at Spartan Stadium.

    I know people point to LSU last year starting with Oregon and all, and I'd be fine with scheduling like that . . . as soon as MSU has wave after wave of future NFLers in the 3-deep. Don't get me wrong; I like MSU's talent and really love what MD has done thus far, but MSU is not ready to accept "all comers" week after week.

    Finally, I'd prefer the marquee OOC match-up to occur at the end of the year, in the bowl game. Bowls get more play time than early OOC games, because the bowls are the last game before 8 months of no CFB. Playing in and winning a marquee bowl does more than playing and beating a marquee non-conf. opponent during the regular season. And how do you get to play in the top bowls? Win your regular season games . . .

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

    SpartanRocky

  • Diodotus said...

    but Rocky, if you're counting on an undefeated season to get us where we want to go, we should have an objective look at how often that happens. When did a B1G team go undefeated? Maybe OSU in 2002? I'd take it when it happens, but it is EXTREMELY difficult to go undefeated overall or even just in the conference slate, and that was before the championship game.

    How did LSU get to the championship game this year? Perceived strength of schedule, not a perfect record. So playing and beating more tough teams is an advantage.

    LSU got to the NC game by being the only undefeated BCS conf. team. Are you talking about Alabama? Their best win was against PSU OOC, and it was cream puffs other than that.

    Can someone point out an undefeated BCS conf. team that was excluded from the NC, when the NC had at least one participant with 1 L? There are several years where an undefeated BCS conf. team was excluded in favor of 2 other undefeated BCS conf. teams, but I can't recall a year where an undefeated BCS conf. team was excluded from the N.C. game in favor of a 1 L BCS conf. team.

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

    SpartanRocky

  • blanch32 said...

    Yea. Man did that cal gm back in 2009 suck!

    Umm, that was Hoyer's SR year, in 2008, and MSU lost that game.

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

    SpartanRocky

  • blanch32 said...

    Conversely. Id argue the only reason we lost that nd gm was bc fl atl and young st flat out did not have us prepared.

    Look, last and 1999 are perfect examples of why we need to play in bigger gms. Despite dominating uofm both times and ending w the same record, we got passed over. Why? Perception. Only way we can change that is to do it on the field. Idaho state ain't going to cut it.

    Yea, MSU needed tougher opponents last year than YSU and FAU prior to ND. They didn't need to play Arkansas and OK State before ND either.

    Like I said, I'm all about balance; medium OOC's when the Big 10 schedule sets up to be tough, tougher OOC's when the Big 10 schedule is lighter. Never should MSU be in a Wisconsin situation in terms of scheduling.

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

    SpartanRocky

  • SpartanRocky said...

    LSU got to the NC game by being the only undefeated BCS conf. team. Are you talking about Alabama? Their best win was against PSU OOC, and it was cream puffs other than that.

    Can someone point out an undefeated BCS conf. team that was excluded from the NC, when the NC had at least one participant with 1 L? There are several years where an undefeated BCS conf. team was excluded in favor of 2 other undefeated BCS conf. teams, but I can't recall a year where an undefeated BCS conf. team was excluded from the N.C. game in favor of a 1 L BCS conf. team.

    Alabama got to the chapionship game by winning the SEC.
    LSU was undefeated until they lost to Alabama in SEC championship game. LSU played and beat three top 3 ranked teams in 2011. They played and beat West Virginia on the road. Oregon was a neutral site game. But their scheduled was exceptionally strong and that's why other teams, ie Wisconsin 10-2, Stanford 11-1, Oklahoma State 11-1, Boisie State 11-1, etc were over looked in favor of BCS at large LSU.

    Auburn was undefeated in 2004 and fell to the Sugar Bowl--entirely because their non-conference schedule was crap.

    So which is worse? Dumb down the schedule to go undefeated and have the pollsters hold you out in favor of other undefeated teams, or even a 1 loss team team deemed more worthy, or playing a tougher schedule and controlling your destiny?

    This post was edited by Diodotus on 5/7/2012 at 12:32 PM

    Diodotus ●

Michigan State
247Sports
Features
Resources
Connect

247Sports In partnership with CBS Sports