Warning: Creating default object from empty value in /home/tandceli/public_html/wp-content/themes/terryfostersblog/functions/admin-hooks.php on line 160

Spartans more deserving of BCS game than Michigan

Written By: Terry Foster | December 4, 2011

Filed Under: Uncategorized

Detroit News photo

Tonight is the BCS Bowl selection show and Michigan is expected to get a berth in a BCS bowl, perhaps the Sugar Bowl. And Michigan State won’t.

If that happens it would be a terrible mistake because Michigan State (10-3) is more deserving of a BCS game than Michigan (10-2).  Both teams played terrific football but if this is about honoring the better team then the Spartans are the obvious choice.

Here is why.

** Michigan State beat Michigan head to head 28-14 for its fourth straight victory over blue. It was the first time Michigan belonged on the same field with the Spartans in a while, but it was evident who the better team was. Michigan hung with the Spartans until the end mostly because the Spartans decided to play thug ball and nearly penalized itself out of victory.

** Michigan State earned the right to play in the Big Ten title game. Michigan did not. Before the Spartans lost a nailbiter Saturday night you’d find few people who’d say Michigan was more deserving than the Spartans. So you punish MSU for accomplishing something every team in the conference began the season fighting for?

** At the end of the season Michigan fought tooth and nail and won a terrific home game against 6-6 Ohio State. Michigan State lost a tooth and nail neutral site game against 11-2 Wisconsin, which is headed to the Rose Bowl.

** Michigan State beat Wisconsin on a Hail Mary and you can make an arguement Wisconsin did the same in the Big Ten title game.

** Michigan fans will say that their team beat Notre Dame and Nebraska, two teams that beat the Spartans. That is true. However that is trumped by the Spartans who beat Michigan and Iowa, a team that beat Michigan. And Michigan did not play Wisconsin, the best team in the Big Ten.

The one thing that Michigan State cannot overcome is that Michigan is a more attractive team for bowl committees. The program has not been relevant the past four years and now Michigan appears to be back. Any bowl worth its salt wants this team and its fans and its huge television ratings. I do not blame them. I’d want Michigan over Michigan State too. Brady Hoke will drive the media frenzy and Denard Robinson will charm with his smile.

But if it is just about football then MSU deserves a bid over blue.


20 Responses to “Spartans more deserving of BCS game than Michigan”

  1. garry Says:

    Was good game just. Messed up should be going rose bowldis it to them selfs


  2. john Says:

    Hang with Sparty til the end, Terry. It’s what you’re good at. College football is not mathematics of course but for the most part it’s impossible to say for the most part that any big ten team is better than the other. Yes MSU beat Michigan but then again Michigan beat two of the teams that crushed the Spartans. It’s parity and it’s here to stay in most sports unfortunately. If Michigan and MSU played again there is guarantee the Spartans would win. Michigan may not deserve a BCS bid but they deserve one over MSU.


  3. chuck Says:

    Maybe next year!!!!!!


  4. Terrell Wilson Says:

    First of all the only impressive win State had was against Iowa,The Michigan was a one score all the way until Denard threw that pick six. They best Wisconsin on a hail Mary ,barely beat OSU and OSU had multiple suspensions to key players! Plus Sparty had a WHALE of a time putting a TERRIBLE Minnesota team not to mention they got SMOKED by ND and Nebraska in which Michiganbeat!! So the argument that State is deserving over the Wolverines is debatable #GOBLUE


    • Debate Queen Says:

      You are right, it is debatable. So let’s debate.

      UofM beat ND in the last seconds of the game and Nebraska, the two teams State lost to, both at home. State lost to the two aforementioned teams while away. Home field advantage is an indisputable beneficiary factor in college football. This is no way discredits UofM wins, especially the win over Nebraska which was very impressive.

      UofM beat OSU (at home) while State also beat them (away) but you discredit State due to the fact that OSU had players suspended. Alright, let’s turn the tables. UofM beat Minnesota very decidedly at home at the beginning of the season and without Minnesota’s Marqueis Gray, who played a very good game against MSU, which at the time of the MSU/Minn game, Minnesota had improved their game a considerable amount as opposed to when they played UofM

      MSU beat Wisconsin on a hail mary, yes. But on Saturday night they controlled the majority of the game against a very good team, the best in the Big 10 and fell short in the end after once again they were predicted to be blown out of the water. Despite their loss, they proved that they could hang in there and compete with Wisconsin. UofM didn’t play Wisconsin this season.

      UofM went to Iowa and lost. Was it close? Yes. MSU went to Iowa and won. Was it close? No.

      And finally, MSU beat UofM. Even when they practically shot themselves in the foot, they won. But the bottom line is that MSU won, and they won because they are/were the better team this season. That’s why they made it to the Big 10 championship game and UofM didn’t.

      Also please note how I don’t need to use CAPS to prove any of my points. Thank you and come again.


      • lawls Says:

        too bad it doesn’t matter because UM is in the BCS and MSU is not.

        so stop crying it makes your fanbase look bad.


      • yourpretentious Says:

        in all lower caps so that it is more legitimate.
        michigans strength of schedule 17th
        michigan states strength of schedule 67th
        michigans overall record 10-2
        michigan states overall record 10-3


    • matt Says:

      If you’ve ever played football before, or sports for that matter, home field advantage makes a whale of a difference. MSU lost on the road after being beaten down for weeks in a row at Nebraska while Michigan caught them at home after Nebraska had been beaten up. Stop looking through blue glasses.


  5. Not Terrell Wilson Says:

    Michigan’s wins against Notre Dame and Nebraska were both home games. State played both of those teams on the road. Michigan never had to play Wisconsin. not to mention twice! State had a far more difficult schedule. Michigan State is THE best program in this state and regardless of what the BCS decides, Michigan does not deserve a BCS bid over Michigan State. Scoredboard …. 4 years and counting. GO GREEN!


    • Rob Says:

      Your stupid, Stop concentrating on the last 4 years!!!! Michigan is just coming back from thier worst period in the history of the program and you Sparty’s are hanging you hats on that. If you go for the next 4 years and beat Michigan, then i will give you some credit. Look at the history of this matchup and you will see who owns who!!! beating Michigan 4 years in a row doesn’t make you a PROGRAM, many teams beat us in that 3 year period, so no big claim to fame for MSU. Like i said, if you keep extending the streak after this year, then i will give you all the credit in the world.
      Oh no, wait, you lose almost ALL of your skill positions next year, so your offense is gonna suck! Isn’t the defense have 3-4 seniors in key positions also? hmmmmmm, I guess we will see what a backup QB and WR’s will do for you in the BIG HOUSE.


  6. Mike Ringle Says:

    MSU had a better Big Ten record and a tougher schedule. Other than Nebraska who of note did UM beat? And don’t forget that the UM-OSU game wasn’t a beating by UM, plus UM’s defense didn’t play them anywhere close to as tight as MSU’s did.

    Don’t use the suspensions against the MSU win. That’s a lazy argument. Every week there’s a chance players will be missing or suspended from any given team. MSU doesn’t excuse their losses to ND or Nebraska.

    Plus, I feel that the head-to-head record and championship game performance should hold more weight. MSU had to play Wisconsin twice, UM had to play them… Oh wait, never. But the “prestige” of the UM name will get them a BCS bid over a better team most years if the rankings are close.


  7. Dave Dlouhy Says:

    The SEC has been doing this for years. The winner of the championship game doesn’t make a good bowl game. Now the it happens to the big ten and it becomes a big deal. For now on it will be a fact of life, if you lose the title game you will not make a good bowl. Other teams will jump ahead of you because you will one more lose. Well at least it gives you something to write about.


  8. David Rogers Says:

    Agreed, Terry. If Michigan played State’s schedule this isn’t even a discussion.


  9. Tony Says:

    I’m sorry Terrell, but did you even watch the game last night? Michigan State was truly the better team. Unfortunately it didn’t result in a win. This is the second time this season State competed nicely with the best team in the Big Ten; something that Michigan didn’t do.


    • lawls Says:

      “did you even watch the game last night? Michigan State was truly the better team. Unfortunately it didn’t result in a win.”

      How interesting!!! Michigan was truly the better team in EL, but unfortunately, it didn’t result in a win.


  10. Shawn D Says:

    Terry your 100% correct, but going into this at the beginning of the season we all knew (well those of us that have a working knowledge) this is the system we invest our hearts and souls in and this is the system that will take a program like Michigan over MSU every day of the week. MSU says they want to be one of the big boys and be big brother, well you gotta handle business like big brother. If michigan wins the sugar bowl (albeit might be a farse team like TCU or K stat and MSU gets throttled by georgia or SEC team, this will set MSU back badly.


  11. Joseph Terrell Says:

    T Fo MSU no question deserves it over Michigan. Unfortunately it’s all about money and politics. BCS is BS.


  12. Bill Says:

    I love the people who say that homefield is a huge advantage and thats why Michigan was able to beat Nebraska and why MSU lost to them. Yet, fail to mention that the MSU Michigan game was in East Lansing. That may be a completely different game if it were in Ann Arbor. Also, getting to play OSU without the TaT 5 and having Joe Bauserman starting that game is a HUGE advantage. Obviously, not having to play Wisconsin is a huge advantage(Let alone twice) for Michigan but I don’t remember too many Spartan fans complaining that they got to avoid OSU last year when making their Rose Bowl case. I have no doubt that Michigan will get screwed by the same system in future years so I’m gonna enjoy this one. P.S. a 3 loss team, should never play in a BCS game.


  13. Valenti's Lap Dog Says:


    Good job being Mike’s b*tch and having him spoon feed you all your points.
    Do you ever give an original thought? Do you ever find your balls to oppose Valenti’s “schtick” every now and then? Or is you “schtick” just to be the scared, older nut-hanger of Mike Valenti.

    You do reaalize that your reputation is that you’re his “yes man”? You come across as very vanilla and never having an original, opposing thought on anything in regards to Mike and you “opinions” in general. If not, step back and take an objective look…or listen…as to the reality of how you come across and are viewed.

    I know you have heard this MANY times. It’s funny how Sam Webb even said Live on his show.

    Anyway, it could be worse, you could be Drewn Sharp, but it’s not much better being a timid “Robin” to Mike Valenti’s “Batman

    Hopefully you get some balls on your show.


  14. SJD Says:

    How is this even close to a debate? I don’t understand how any fan of college football can look at these two team’s resumes and say to themselves, “yup, Michigan was the better team this year”.

    Michigan fans love to say that Michigan State “got blown out” by Nebraska and Notre Dame; however, they’re very quick to say that Michigan State “barely beat Michigan at home”. Uhm, excuse me? Michigan State lost to Nebraska and Notre Dame by an average of 19.5 points. Michigan State was up 21-7 against Michigan in the 4th quarter and was about to receive the ball back before a personal foul that gave the Wolverines a 1st down that led to a Michigan touchdown. It was very close to being a 21 point game, rather than a 14 point game. Thus, we can average that Michigan State “should have won by” 17.5 points.

    Now, you guys would honestly say that Michigan State losing by 19.5 points is a blowout, but you claim that a 17.5 point game is a “close game”? Where’s the line that you have to cross for it to be a blowout?

    The point is that a loss is a loss. Michigan barely competed against Michigan State this year. Michigan losing to Michigan State and Iowa outweighs Michigan State losing to Nebraska and Notre Dame by a longshot. Throw in the fact that Michigan State played a march harder schedule — including two games against the #1 B1G team, Wisconsin — and this argument is looking pretty one-sided.


Leave a Reply