Good game, Nits

PSU2UNC

Well-Known Member
Feb 9, 2016
6,476
6,855
1
OSU has 1 down year since they fired Cooper. I'm not sure I follow ya there. Michigan was a mess post-Carr and pre-Harbaugh.

Sparty still won during that period. What are you against in that statement?
Two things to clarify:

Not all 11-1 OSU teams are created equal. Some are juggernauts, other are not.

Michigan being down is what really helped MSU. They capitalized on Michigan's poor years (during the RichRod and Hoke eras) to out recruit UM.

In the last 12 years (back to 2000) MSU has beaten OSU 3 times. Over that same time period PSU has beaten OSU 5 times. But you are somehow arguing that MSU has been the better program against OSU?
 

scrivener

Well-Known Member
Gold Member
Jan 19, 2002
2,595
2,123
1
Two things to clarify:

Not all 11-1 OSU teams are created equal. Some are juggernauts, other are not.

Michigan being down is what really helped MSU. They capitalized on Michigan's poor years (during the RichRod and Hoke eras) to out recruit UM.

In the last 12 years (back to 2000) MSU has beaten OSU 3 times. Over that same time period PSU has beaten OSU 5 times. But you are somehow arguing that MSU has been the better program against OSU?
In 2010, MSU earned a share of the Big Ten Championship after finishing the year in a three-way tie with Ohio State and Wisconsin. Dantonio's 2011 team won their division and appeared in the Big Ten Title Game. MSU won outright Big Ten Championships in 2013 and 2015 with victories in the 2013 and 2015 Championship Games. He had an 8–4 record against Michigan. And, of course, a playoff appearance. So, to some, Dantonio and MSU absolutely has been a better program from the standpoint of their up years, than PSU. He also had multiple 11-win regular seasons...JF hasn't done that once.
 
Last edited:

ryoder1

Well-Known Member
Feb 17, 2007
2,197
1,668
1
In 2010, MSU earned a share of the Big Ten Championship after finishing the year in a three-way tie with Ohio State and Wisconsin. Dantonio's 2011 team won their division and appeared in the Big Ten Title Game. MSU won outright Big Ten Championships in 2013 and 2015 with victories in the 2013 and 2015 Championship Games. He had an 8–4 record against Michigan. And, of course, a playoff appearance. So, to some, Dantonio and MSU absolutely has been a better program from the standpoint of their up years, than PSU. He also had multiple 11-win regular seasons...JF hasn't done that once.
Since '16 the series is 3-3. Dantonio had his pinnacle beating PSU as we were buiding back in '14 and '15. I guess you could say they are better just based on them making the playoff and we have not although are they better than Michigan if you look back to '14 I think they have more wins over them but no one would say that now. I think you could surmise PSU and MSU are basically equal at this point although I fully expect to beat them this year which gives us a 4-3 advantage since '16.
 
  • Like
Reactions: scrivener

lazydave841

Well-Known Member
Jan 9, 2021
2,829
2,837
1
MSU has been the better program against OSU?

Dantonio does have a better record vs OSU than Franklin.

He also has a playoff appearance.

The gist of the initial comment was that nobody has beaten OSU at any good regularity. Paterno is responsible for 4 of the 5.

Franklin isn't getting it done, but who is? Dantonio and Dabo are the best most recently.
 

PSU2UNC

Well-Known Member
Feb 9, 2016
6,476
6,855
1
In 2010, MSU earned a share of the Big Ten Championship after finishing the year in a three-way tie with Ohio State and Wisconsin. Dantonio's 2011 team won their division and appeared in the Big Ten Title Game. MSU won outright Big Ten Championships in 2013 and 2015 with victories in the 2013 and 2015 Championship Games. He had an 8–4 record against Michigan. And, of course, a playoff appearance. So, to some, Dantonio and MSU absolutely has been a better program from the standpoint of their up years, than PSU. He also had multiple 11-win regular seasons...JF hasn't done that once.
During those years, UM was not good. Additionally, PSU was handicapped by undeserved sanctions starting in 2012.

That's why MSU was able to do that.

It's all about context.
 

scrivener

Well-Known Member
Gold Member
Jan 19, 2002
2,595
2,123
1
During those years, UM was not good. Additionally, PSU was handicapped by undeserved sanctions starting in 2012.

That's why MSU was able to do that.

It's all about context.
I mean sure...there is context to everything. MSU still had a few tremendous years in a row. It's okay to acknowledge other programs successes when we compare it to what PSU has or hasn't done. The bottom line, half the teams in our division have made the playoffs. That is the context I need to know that we are close and not quite there yet. Is JF the man to take us there....nobody knows that.
 
  • Like
Reactions: CbusLion10

lazydave841

Well-Known Member
Jan 9, 2021
2,829
2,837
1
My point is "why did Sparty make it?"

Because they were a good team.

4 top 15 wins. 2 top 10 wins. Excellent resume. Even caught an undefeated Iowa (albeit they missed any ranked cross over opponents) in ccg.

Michigan wasn't down. We were, but Iowa was up. Played Oregon OOC and won. Very respectable team that Saban bìtchslapped en route to another title.
 

PSU2UNC

Well-Known Member
Feb 9, 2016
6,476
6,855
1
Because they were a good team.

4 top 15 wins. 2 top 10 wins. Excellent resume. Even caught an undefeated Iowa (albeit they missed any ranked cross over opponents) in ccg.

Michigan wasn't down. We were, but Iowa was up. Played Oregon OOC and won. Very respectable team that Saban bìtchslapped en route to another title.
They were a good team. But they were not any better than this year's PSU team. Or the 2019 PSU team. Or the 2016 PSU team.

I've preached this before but there is an element of randomness is CFB. If you played last week's game 10 times, OSU doesn't win every time (I'd guess they win about half because they got some pretty outlier-ish turnover luck).

So when a good team gets some randomness on their side, they win more games than when a good team gets some bad breaks.
 

LandoComando

Well-Known Member
Nov 29, 2021
4,961
1,566
1
We took advantage of our opportunity in 2016. It is absurd that OSU made the playoff that year over us.
It isn't absurd--their resume was better than us. We lost 2 games to Pitt and Michigan. The issue wasn't Ohio State getting in over us it was Washington getting in over us.
 
  • Like
Reactions: scrivener

PSU2UNC

Well-Known Member
Feb 9, 2016
6,476
6,855
1
It isn't absurd--their resume was better than us. We lost 2 games to Pitt and Michigan. The issue wasn't Ohio State getting in over us it was Washington getting in over us.
Taking a non-conference champion over the conference champion when the CC defeated the non-champion is absurd.

(if you want to argue OSU should have also gotten in instead of UW, that's possibly an argument)
 
  • Like
Reactions: johnmpsu

scrivener

Well-Known Member
Gold Member
Jan 19, 2002
2,595
2,123
1
Taking a non-conference champion over the conference champion when the CC defeated the non-champion is absurd.

(if you want to argue OSU should have also gotten in instead of UW, that's possibly an argument)
Well, with the expanded playoff, this situation will likely happen, which is absurd to me. What if you have a three loss conf champion and a one loss 2nd place team in that conf? Your body of work should also matter.
 
  • Like
Reactions: CbusLion10

PSU2UNC

Well-Known Member
Feb 9, 2016
6,476
6,855
1
Well, with the expanded playoff, this situation will likely happen, which is absurd to me. What if you have a three loss conf champion and a one loss 2nd place team in that conf? Your body of work should also matter.
Seems unlikely this would happen with 12. Maybe for the PAC12 or Big12 (since they will be somewhat lesser conferences in the coming years) but a 1 loss non-champ Big Ten or SEC team will certainly get in with 12 teams.
 

LandoComando

Well-Known Member
Nov 29, 2021
4,961
1,566
1
Taking a non-conference champion over the conference champion when the CC defeated the non-champion is absurd.

(if you want to argue OSU should have also gotten in instead of UW, that's possibly an argument)
It isn't though. Conference titles have never been defining in college football. I've said an infinite number of times that not winning the division or conference doesn't mean you can't be the best team in the nation--we see that all the time in men's basketball. We should have been #4--the top 3 were right.
 

LandoComando

Well-Known Member
Nov 29, 2021
4,961
1,566
1
On a fluke play.

PSU wins that game 9 out of 10 times and if they played later in the season it wouldn't have been close.
But we didn't win it--which cost us a playoff spot. It was a bad loss regardless of spin.

If we played Ohio State 10 times that year how many do you think we win? Wouldn't most say it was a fluke we beat them?
 
  • Like
Reactions: CbusLion10

PSU2UNC

Well-Known Member
Feb 9, 2016
6,476
6,855
1
But we didn't win it--which cost us a playoff spot. It was a bad loss regardless of spin.

If we played Ohio State 10 times that year how many do you think we win? Wouldn't most say it was a fluke we beat them?
The OSU game did not come down to a singular play (despite what people think). PSU wins that 4 out of 10 times.
 
  • Like
Reactions: CbusLion10

PSU2UNC

Well-Known Member
Feb 9, 2016
6,476
6,855
1
It isn't though. Conference titles have never been defining in college football. I've said an infinite number of times that not winning the division or conference doesn't mean you can't be the best team in the nation--we see that all the time in men's basketball. We should have been #4--the top 3 were right.
Men's basketball does not crown the best team in the nation as national champion. It crowns the team that is playing the best during a 3 week period in the spring. That's all. As much as I love March Madness, it doesn't determine who the best team is.
 

LandoComando

Well-Known Member
Nov 29, 2021
4,961
1,566
1
Men's basketball does not crown the best team in the nation as national champion. It crowns the team that is playing the best during a 3 week period in the spring. That's all. As much as I love March Madness, it doesn't determine who the best team is.
Nor does the bowl system. The point is to be prepared and be the best team at that point of the season not months prior
 

ryoder1

Well-Known Member
Feb 17, 2007
2,197
1,668
1
Men's basketball does not crown the best team in the nation as national champion. It crowns the team that is playing the best during a 3 week period in the spring. That's all. As much as I love March Madness, it doesn't determine who the best team is.
You are right. Same with baseball. Phillies almost win and they were like the 12th best team. Nats a couple years ago. Even the Braves last year. Cheaters this year were one of the best but the Dodgers were better.
 

PSU2UNC

Well-Known Member
Feb 9, 2016
6,476
6,855
1
Nor does the bowl system. The point is to be prepared and be the best team at that point of the season not months prior
The playoff system does a better job because fewer teams get in and they are considering the entire body of work (not how you are playing during your conference tournament at the end of the year).

But since you brought it up, for those people who are are clamoring that bowls don't mean anything, PSU shouldn't be happy about a NY6, consider this:

In the NFL, 44% of the teams make the playoffs. Most fans consider their team making the playoffs a good (but not great) year.

In CFB, 13% of teams make the playoffs or NY6 bowls. That's a huge accomplishment for either.
 
  • Like
Reactions: The Spin Meister

LandoComando

Well-Known Member
Nov 29, 2021
4,961
1,566
1
The playoff system does a better job because fewer teams get in and they are considering the entire body of work (not how you are playing during your conference tournament at the end of the year).

But since you brought it up, for those people who are are clamoring that bowls don't mean anything, PSU shouldn't be happy about a NY6, consider this:

In the NFL, 44% of the teams make the playoffs. Most fans consider their team making the playoffs a good (but not great) year.

In CFB, 13% of teams make the playoffs or NY6 bowls. That's a huge accomplishment for either.
But not all CFB are equal as you know.
And bowls mean absolutely nothing--they're glorified scrimmages for cities and networks to make money. The winner gets a trophy but doesn't alter their season at all. Win or lose bowls aren't how teams are judged now.
You can be happy about whatever you want just don't pretend it's meaningful. Anything short of the playoff is a failure.
And far more teams need to make the playoffs--that's the entire point. FBS should be 24 teams.
 

PSU2UNC

Well-Known Member
Feb 9, 2016
6,476
6,855
1
But not all CFB are equal as you know.
And bowls mean absolutely nothing--they're glorified scrimmages for cities and networks to make money. The winner gets a trophy but doesn't alter their season at all. Win or lose bowls aren't how teams are judged now.
You can be happy about whatever you want just don't pretend it's meaningful. Anything short of the playoff is a failure.
And far more teams need to make the playoffs--that's the entire point. FBS should be 24 teams.
You can argue no college football game "means" anything. It is, after all, just a game. Whatever worth you are assigning to the playoff is your own value judgement. It is just as valid to say that the bowls "mean" something (and I think history suggests they mean a lot).
 
  • Like
Reactions: PSUSignore

rrdd2021

Well-Known Member
Jan 10, 2022
346
314
1
On a fluke play.

PSU wins that game 9 out of 10 times and if they played later in the season it wouldn't have been close.
The reason that PSU didn't make the playoffs in 2016 was not so much the "fluke" Pitt loss, but the total thumping they took - 49-10 - from Michigan that year. No 2-loss team has ever made the playoffs and especially one that had that bad of blowout loss
 

PSU2UNC

Well-Known Member
Feb 9, 2016
6,476
6,855
1
The reason that PSU didn't make the playoffs in 2016 was not so much the "fluke" Pitt loss, but the total thumping they took - 49-10 - from Michigan that year. No 2-loss team has ever made the playoffs and especially one that had that bad of blowout loss
That's fair, but if PSU had one loss on the year and was Big Ten champ, even if that one loss was bad (UM), PSU still would have made the playoff.
 

LandoComando

Well-Known Member
Nov 29, 2021
4,961
1,566
1
You can argue no college football game "means" anything. It is, after all, just a game. Whatever worth you are assigning to the playoff is your own value judgement. It is just as valid to say that the bowls "mean" something (and I think history suggests they mean a lot).
In the past, which you apparently still live in, bowls had some meaning because there wasn't a playoff. A bowl is like a consolation bracket in a competitive tournament. You give the kids that aren't good an extra game or two. It's a participation trophy.
 

LandoComando

Well-Known Member
Nov 29, 2021
4,961
1,566
1
That's fair, but if PSU had one loss on the year and was Big Ten champ, even if that one loss was bad (UM), PSU still would have made the playoff.
We actually agree for once. Just couldn't get blown out and lose to an average/bad Pitt team