Wait till natty game to evaluate MSU loss to Bama

InTenSity wrote:

The_Dude wrote:

No. And Clemson wont get rolled.

Maybe next time the teams that you root for should win a few more games, then they might be selected. Don't go around discounting MSU being in the playoff. Top 5 team.

Just giving my opinions after actually watching teams play on the field.

MSU really lacks the top end speed at key position groups that the other top teams have.

The_Dude wrote:

InTenSity wrote:
Maybe next time the teams that you root for should win a few more games, then they might be selected. Don't go around discounting MSU being in the playoff. Top 5 team.

Just giving my opinions after actually watching teams play on the field.

MSU really lacks the top end speed at key position groups that the other top teams have.

there's your problem..

The_Dude wrote:

InTenSity wrote:
Maybe next time the teams that you root for should win a few more games, then they might be selected. Don't go around discounting MSU being in the playoff. Top 5 team.

Just giving my opinions after actually watching teams play on the field.

MSU really lacks the top end speed at key position groups that the other top teams have.

Me too. Other than Bama, I'm not sure who else could beat MSU, I mean other than Nebraska.

Robert J Sakimano wrote:

The_Dude wrote:

Just giving my opinions after actually watching teams play on the field.

MSU really lacks the top end speed at key position groups that the other top teams have.

there's your problem..

I guess that makes me a scUM fan?

The_Dude wrote:

Robert J Sakimano wrote:there's your problem..

I guess that makes me a scUM fan?

yeah apparently I am too.. for whatever reason.

GRR Spartan wrote:After MSU lost to Alabama in the Citrus Bowl we saw major changes and improvements that resulted in Big Ten Championships and wining the Rose and Cotton Bowls.

At the same time while Dantonio thought he was improving MSU to match up better against Alabama, Saban was improving what he had getting deeper depth charts and faster LB's.

MSU was good enough to beat Ohio State and umaa at their place, good enough to beat Iowa on a neutral field and all that was done with recruiting classes from 2011 through tentative 2016 ranked #31, #41, #40, #22, #22 and #15 so far in '16

Alabama's recruiting for the same classes: #1, #1, #1, #1, #2 and #9 in '16. All those 4* and 5* players and slippage in Tuscaloosa is from #1 or 2 to #9.

(both according to Rivals)

I think Dantonio smells the coffee again and we see a drift to more mobile QB's, better (faster) receivers and LB's who are faster/stronger than we have seen.

I don't know much about Lewerke and Messiah DeWeaver, for 2017 and beyond. From a star rating standpoint, Lewerke and DeWeaver are QB upgrades, but I haven't watched any of their highlight videos. Are they pocket passers with mobility?

Robert J Sakimano wrote:

The_Dude wrote:

I guess that makes me a scUM fan?

yeah apparently I am too.. for whatever reason.

No, you're not a SCum fan, you're just obsessed with them. Your hatred of SCum has been well documented in many of your posts. You're a busy man what with all that SCum obsessing, gun perteckting, and Bible thumping, and right wing trolling. I just don't know how you find the time...

GRR Spartan wrote:

I think Dantonio smells the coffee again and we see a drift to more mobile QB's, better (faster) receivers and LB's who are faster/stronger than we have seen.

This sounds a tad too idealistic. Like they didn't think of recruiting better and faster players before Alabama pounded us?

Or is this about aiming higher and recruiting more 4/5 stars? But I thought those didn't really matter? I am just confused.

Other Teams Pursuing That wrote:

GRR Spartan wrote:

I think Dantonio smells the coffee again and we see a drift to more mobile QB's, better (faster) receivers and LB's who are faster/stronger than we have seen.

This sounds a tad too idealistic. Like they didn't think of recruiting better and faster players before Alabama pounded us?

Or is this about aiming higher and recruiting more 4/5 stars? But I thought those didn't really matter? I am just confused.

Yeah...as if Dantonio didn't already try to get the best players he could?

The_Dude wrote:

InTenSity wrote:
Maybe next time the teams that you root for should win a few more games, then they might be selected. Don't go around discounting MSU being in the playoff. Top 5 team.

Just giving my opinions after actually watching teams play on the field.

MSU really lacks the top end speed at key position groups that the other top teams have.

Wait, I'm confused. I thought MSU just needed to play the 3rd string QB and go to a spread offense ?

I'm really having trouble keeping up here.

The_Dude wrote:

Other Teams Pursuing That wrote:

This sounds a tad too idealistic. Like they didn't think of recruiting better and faster players before Alabama pounded us?

Or is this about aiming higher and recruiting more 4/5 stars? But I thought those didn't really matter? I am just confused.

Yeah...as if Dantonio didn't already try to get the best players he could?

Dantonio has turned kids down after an official visit. "Good kids"'don't necessarily equate to the best measurables. They need to fit in too

DWags wrote:

The_Dude wrote:


Yeah...as if Dantonio didn't already try to get the best players he could?

Dantonio has turned kids down after an official visit. "Good kids"'don't necessarily equate to the best measurables. They need to fit in too

Glenn Winston fit in great..

Other Teams Pursuing That wrote:

DWags wrote:

Dantonio has turned kids down after an official visit. "Good kids"'don't necessarily equate to the best measurables. They need to fit in too

Glenn Winston fit in great..

Till he was dismissed 8 years ago now. That long and we have one example?

Look at what changed after the last New Years Day debacle and I don't think it's being "a tad too idealistic " and yes you are confused.  i have never said recruiting rankings can be ignored.  MSU has shown the ability to identify players who can compete to win Big Ten titles and weren't highly rated coming out of high school.  But along with that is team's are paying attention to whom MSU is offering.  Those 2*'s and 3*'s  are getting bumps due to MSU's interest.  
After 2010 Dantionio and staff had the 6-7 year and four recruiting classes that were very average.  The success since has hopefully made it easier to get in front of more highly rated players who might fit what MSU wants including buying into the program/system.

I do chuckle at those who somehow think MSU football has plateaued and may slip because they lost to what is the most complete team they faced in 3 years.  Dantionio will adjust because he believes what he preaches when he says "reach higher".   He doesn't like to lose and he's a helluva lot more invested than the : critics .

DWags wrote:

Other Teams Pursuing That wrote:

Glenn Winston fit in great..

Till he was dismissed 8 years ago now. That long and we have one example?

Damn, I feel old. My bad wags.

it's funny how this time last week, we were all saying that Bama was overrated, the SEC was overrated, etc.

now we're all acting like Bama could match up against the '85 Chicago Bears.. and my guess is that if they beat Clemson by more than a field goal, we'll continue with that "they're the greatest team in the history of football" narrative..

Robert J Sakimano wrote:it's funny how this time last week, we were all saying that Bama was overrated, the SEC was overrated, etc.

now we're all acting like Bama could match up against the '85 Chicago Bears.. and my guess is that if they beat Clemson by more than a field goal, we'll continue with that "they're the greatest team in the history of football" narrative..

You have any links for that? I don't mind the accusations, but I don't recall seeing those sentiments. I'm sure it was said, and maybe I'm blocking that out.

Its also good to know that you were lurking while on vacation.

InTenSity wrote:

Robert J Sakimano wrote:it's funny how this time last week, we were all saying that Bama was overrated, the SEC was overrated, etc.

now we're all acting like Bama could match up against the '85 Chicago Bears.. and my guess is that if they beat Clemson by more than a field goal, we'll continue with that "they're the greatest team in the history of football" narrative..

You have any links for that? I don't mind the accusations, but I don't recall seeing those sentiments. I'm sure it was said, and maybe I'm blocking that out.

Its also good to know that you were lurking while on vacation.

I don't really feel like diggin' it up..

which, of course, means nobody said anything like that. We were all extolling the virtue of Alabama, their program, the SEC and Nick Saban and that it would take a monumental effort by us to win the game. They were that good.

Other Teams Pursuing That wrote:

DWags wrote:

Dantonio has turned kids down after an official visit. "Good kids"'don't necessarily equate to the best measurables. They need to fit in too

Glenn Winston fit in great..

is he the guy that was driving around the town my family and I live in waving loaded guns at people?

InTenSity wrote:

Robert J Sakimano wrote:it's funny how this time last week, we were all saying that Bama was overrated, the SEC was overrated, etc.

now we're all acting like Bama could match up against the '85 Chicago Bears.. and my guess is that if they beat Clemson by more than a field goal, we'll continue with that "they're the greatest team in the history of football" narrative..

You have any links for that? I don't mind the accusations, but I don't recall seeing those sentiments. I'm sure it was said, and maybe I'm blocking that out.

Its also good to know that you were lurking while on vacation.

I remember hearing that we had the kind of team that would match up well with them (think I heard that on ESPN though).

The reality is you need a strong OL + a vertical passing attack and/or a mobile QB to beat Alabama.

Robert J Sakimano wrote:

InTenSity wrote:
You have any links for that? I don't mind the accusations, but I don't recall seeing those sentiments. I'm sure it was said, and maybe I'm blocking that out.

Its also good to know that you were lurking while on vacation.

I don't really feel like diggin' it up..

which, of course, means nobody said anything like that.

Yep. They were a ten point favorite.

Robert J Sakimano wrote:

Other Teams Pursuing That wrote:

Glenn Winston fit in great..

is he the guy that was driving around the town my family and I live in waving loaded guns at people?

Loaded?

NigelUno wrote:

InTenSity wrote:
You have any links for that? I don't mind the accusations, but I don't recall seeing those sentiments. I'm sure it was said, and maybe I'm blocking that out.

Its also good to know that you were lurking while on vacation.

I remember hearing that we had the kind of team that would match up well with them (think I heard that on ESPN though).

The reality is you need a strong OL + a vertical passing attack and/or a mobile QB to beat Alabama.

I personally thought we did because I didn't see them being able to take advantage of our weak secondary. In the games I had watched Coker couldn't hit the broadside of a barn. In addition, I didn't feel like they had faced many offenses that were as multi-dimensional as we were.

Guess I was wrong.

WhiteBoyHatcher wrote:

NigelUno wrote:

I remember hearing that we had the kind of team that would match up well with them (think I heard that on ESPN though).

The reality is you need a strong OL + a vertical passing attack and/or a mobile QB to beat Alabama.

I personally thought we did because I didn't see them being able to take advantage of our weak secondary. In the games I had watched Coker couldn't hit the broadside of a barn. In addition, I didn't feel like they had faced many offenses that were as multi-dimensional as we were.

Guess I was wrong.

We had a chance, but Coker had all day to throw (and Cook didn't). They hit when they went deep (and pretty much on everything else). Their DL was just too strong.

I think people sometimes (for whatever reason) underestimate how good Alabama is in the trenches.

NigelUno wrote:

InTenSity wrote:
You have any links for that? I don't mind the accusations, but I don't recall seeing those sentiments. I'm sure it was said, and maybe I'm blocking that out.

Its also good to know that you were lurking while on vacation.

I remember hearing that we had the kind of team that would match up well with them (think I heard that on ESPN though).

The reality is you need a strong OL + a vertical passing attack and/or a mobile QB to beat Alabama.

man, Alabama is a great team. Very impressive.

Robert J Sakimano wrote:

Other Teams Pursuing That wrote:

Glenn Winston fit in great..

is he the guy that was driving around the town my family and I live in waving loaded guns at people?

No, Winston curb stomped a hockey player. But he's actually turned his life around and may now actually be in the NFL. Props to him.

Other Teams Pursuing That wrote:

Robert J Sakimano wrote:is he the guy that was driving around the town my family and I live in waving loaded guns at people?

No, Winston curb stomped a hockey player. But he's actually turned his life around and may now actually be in the NFL. Props to him.

I hope is curb-stomping days are behind him.

Other Teams Pursuing That wrote:

Robert J Sakimano wrote:is he the guy that was driving around the town my family and I live in waving loaded guns at people?

No, Winston curb stomped a hockey player. But he's actually turned his life around and may now actually be in the NFL. Props to him.

I hate the term "curb stomped" it makes me think of American History X. Winston punched a guy in the back of the head and he fell on some concrete. He was hurt pretty bad.

At least he didn't hit a woman?

NigelUno wrote:

WhiteBoyHatcher wrote:

I personally thought we did because I didn't see them being able to take advantage of our weak secondary. In the games I had watched Coker couldn't hit the broadside of a barn. In addition, I didn't feel like they had faced many offenses that were as multi-dimensional as we were.

Guess I was wrong.

We had a chance, but Coker had all day to throw (and Cook didn't). They hit when they went deep (and pretty much on everything else). Their DL was just too strong.

I think people sometimes (for whatever reason) underestimate how good Alabama is in the trenches.

We were told this is as strong as MSU has ever been on the lines under Dantonio...so most MSU fans didn't think Bama would just steamroll us as the los. Which they did. Did Calhoun even suit up?

And the left side of the OL is really good...but the right side is average and average gets beat like a mule vs Bama.

The_Dude wrote:

NigelUno wrote:

We had a chance, but Coker had all day to throw (and Cook didn't). They hit when they went deep (and pretty much on everything else). Their DL was just too strong.

I think people sometimes (for whatever reason) underestimate how good Alabama is in the trenches.

We were told this is as strong as MSU has ever been on the lines under Dantonio...so most MSU fans didn't think Bama would just steamroll us as the los. Which they did. Did Calhoun even suit up?

And the left side of the OL is really good...but the right side is average and average gets beat like a mule vs Bama.

I like how you work in "we" and "MSU" in the same post.

You guys remember Henry throwing Calhoun off him? ESPN shows it in their promo like every time.

:(

Other Teams Pursuing That wrote:You guys remember Henry throwing Calhoun off him? ESPN shows it in their promo like every time.

:(

I liked when Malik tackled Henry and gave him the Heisman pose. I think that was in the 1st Half though.

Robert J Sakimano wrote:it's funny how this time last week, we were all saying that Bama was overrated, the SEC was overrated, etc.

now we're all acting like Bama could match up against the '85 Chicago Bears.. and my guess is that if they beat Clemson by more than a field goal, we'll continue with that "they're the greatest team in the history of football" narrative..

You must've been reading tRCMB before the game. There were several threads over there with many posters saying that Alabama and the SEC were overrated. I can tell you I never felt that way, I was nervous about the game and I was worried about Alabama's passing game if we couldn't take away Coker's first option. See here if interested:
https://spartanswill.forumotion.com/t9434-if-bama-comes-out-slinging

Regardless, even if people did believe that Alabama and the SEC were overrated, it was OK for those people to believe that based on the best available evidence prior to the game. I may not have believed it, but it wasn't like no case could be made. In the same way, given the new evidence of our 38-0 loss, it's OK for those same people and others to change their opinion and believe that Alabama might just be world beaters. At this time there's no evidence that can definitively falsify that opinion and plenty of evidence to support it. Perhaps you disagree? By all means, tell us what you think.

I guess I would find it funny if people still believed that Alabama was overrated after what they did to us.

Code_Warrior wrote:

Robert J Sakimano wrote:it's funny how this time last week, we were all saying that Bama was overrated, the SEC was overrated, etc.

now we're all acting like Bama could match up against the '85 Chicago Bears.. and my guess is that if they beat Clemson by more than a field goal, we'll continue with that "they're the greatest team in the history of football" narrative..  

You must've been reading tRCMB before the game.  There were several threads over there with many posters saying that Alabama and the SEC were overrated.  I can tell you I never felt that way, I was nervous about the game and I was worried about Alabama's passing game if we couldn't take away Coker's first option.  See here if interested:
https://spartanswill.forumotion.com/t9434-if-bama-comes-out-slinging

Regardless, even if people did believe that Alabama and the SEC were overrated, it was OK for those people to believe that based on the best available evidence prior to the game.  I may not have believed it, but it wasn't like no case could be made.  In the same way, given the new evidence of our 38-0 loss, it's OK for those same people and others to change their opinion and believe that Alabama might just be world beaters.  At this time there's no evidence that can definitively falsify that opinion and plenty of evidence to support it.  Perhaps you disagree?  By all means, tell us what you think.

I guess I would find it funny if people still believed that Alabama was overrated after what they did to us.

yeah it was the week before xmas - I was out for a bit. But most MSU fans were minimizing Alabama, the SEC, etc.

Pride comes before the fall.. or.. Delaney.

oh, and, yes - people at tSwill can certainly believe what they want. And even voice their opinions. It's what makes tSwill great.

NigelUno wrote:

The_Dude wrote:


We were told this is as strong as MSU has ever been on the lines under Dantonio...so most MSU fans didn't think Bama would just steamroll us as the los. Which they did. Did Calhoun even suit up?

And the left side of the OL is really good...but the right side is average and average gets beat like a mule vs Bama.

I like how you work in "we" and "MSU" in the same post.

Played.

The_Dude wrote:

NigelUno wrote:

I like how you work in "we" and "MSU" in the same post.

Played.

One would think your schtick is played at this point, but it still lingers on.

NigelUno wrote:

The_Dude wrote:

Played.

One would think your schtick is played at this point, but it still lingers on.

" "

The_Dude wrote:

InTenSity wrote:
Maybe next time the teams that you root for should win a few more games, then they might be selected. Don't go around discounting MSU being in the playoff. Top 5 team.

Just giving my opinions after actually watching teams play on the field.

MSU really lacks the top end speed at key position groups that the other top teams have.

If you watched that game and came away that MSU lost because of speed, then it's no wonder that your analysis falls short time and time again. Alabama's DL flat out kicked our ass. Either Cook was hit, or the pocket was collapsing before he had a chance to set on nearly every play. We already knew they would stuff the run, but the fact that their DL prevented Cook from ever having any comfort in the pocket killed everything we did. When you can do that with only 4 guys, while dropping 7, and the safeties can sit back deep with no need to even think about helping to stop the run, it becomes insanely difficult to pass the ball. All of that directly led to the defense getting worn down. A couple of big plays can be overcome if you can move the ball, but we couldn't.

Can't compete for a national championship? Or can't compete with Alabama on their best day? It's two different things, and the latter almost never had the chance to happen. Remember how Arkansas beat Ole Miss, with the crazy blind lateral on 4th down in OT? If Arkansas doesn't pull off that miracle, Alabama isn't in the SEC title game, doesn't win the SEC title, and likely not in the CFP. No other DL in college football would dominate the way Bama's did. Not saying we would have beaten whoever we would have played, but it wouldn't have been 38-0. And yes, I know that we had an equally miraculous win. It's called football. But my point is that we don't need to be better than Alabama in order to win a national championship. They aren't going to be in our path every year, and they aren't going to be this good every year. 2 years ago, if there were a CFP, we would have been in there with FSU, Auburn, and Stanford. Bama wasn't there. Anyone here that doesn't think we were the best of those by January needs to go back and re-watch the Rose Bowl and NC game. Even last year, by Saban's own admission, Alabama wasn't motivated in the CFP. We caught them when they were extremely motivated with an NFL front 7. That's not going to happen every year, we just caught it when it was. Who knows how we would have fared against Clemson, Oklahoma, or someone else, but I think that is largely part of the point of the OP.

MiamiSpartan wrote:

The_Dude wrote:

Just giving my opinions after actually watching teams play on the field.

MSU really lacks the top end speed at key position groups that the other top teams have.

If you watched that game and came away that MSU lost because of speed, then it's no wonder that your analysis falls short time and time again. Alabama's DL flat out kicked our ass. Either Cook was hit, or the pocket was collapsing before he had a chance to set on nearly every play. We already knew they would stuff the run, but the fact that their DL prevented Cook from ever having any comfort in the pocket killed everything we did. When you can do that with only 4 guys, while dropping 7, and the safeties can sit back deep with no need to even think about helping to stop the run, it becomes insanely difficult to pass the ball. All of that directly led to the defense getting worn down. A couple of big plays can be overcome if you can move the ball, but we couldn't.

Can't compete for a national championship? Or can't compete with Alabama on their best day? It's two different things, and the latter almost never had the chance to happen. Remember how Arkansas beat Ole Miss, with the crazy blind lateral on 4th down in OT? If Arkansas doesn't pull off that miracle, Alabama isn't in the SEC title game, doesn't win the SEC title, and likely not in the CFP. No other DL in college football would dominate the way Bama's did. Not saying we would have beaten whoever we would have played, but it wouldn't have been 38-0. And yes, I know that we had an equally miraculous win. It's called football. But my point is that we don't need to be better than Alabama in order to win a national championship. They aren't going to be in our path every year, and they aren't going to be this good every year. 2 years ago, if there were a CFP, we would have been in there with FSU, Auburn, and Stanford. Bama wasn't there. Anyone here that doesn't think we were the best of those by January needs to go back and re-watch the Rose Bowl and NC game. Even last year, by Saban's own admission, Alabama wasn't motivated in the CFP. We caught them when they were extremely motivated with an NFL front 7. That's not going to happen every year, we just caught it when it was. Who knows how we would have fared against Clemson, Oklahoma, or someone else, but I think that is largely part of the point of the OP.

Good to see "Miami" here. Read your stuff in the past....thoughtful.

MiamiSpartan wrote:

The_Dude wrote:

Just giving my opinions after actually watching teams play on the field.

MSU really lacks the top end speed at key position groups that the other top teams have.

If you watched that game and came away that MSU lost because of speed, then it's no wonder that your analysis falls short time and time again. Alabama's DL flat out kicked our ass. Either Cook was hit, or the pocket was collapsing before he had a chance to set on nearly every play. We already knew they would stuff the run, but the fact that their DL prevented Cook from ever having any comfort in the pocket killed everything we did. When you can do that with only 4 guys, while dropping 7, and the safeties can sit back deep with no need to even think about helping to stop the run, it becomes insanely difficult to pass the ball. All of that directly led to the defense getting worn down. A couple of big plays can be overcome if you can move the ball, but we couldn't.

Can't compete for a national championship? Or can't compete with Alabama on their best day? It's two different things, and the latter almost never had the chance to happen. Remember how Arkansas beat Ole Miss, with the crazy blind lateral on 4th down in OT? If Arkansas doesn't pull off that miracle, Alabama isn't in the SEC title game, doesn't win the SEC title, and likely not in the CFP. No other DL in college football would dominate the way Bama's did. Not saying we would have beaten whoever we would have played, but it wouldn't have been 38-0. And yes, I know that we had an equally miraculous win. It's called football. But my point is that we don't need to be better than Alabama in order to win a national championship. They aren't going to be in our path every year, and they aren't going to be this good every year. 2 years ago, if there were a CFP, we would have been in there with FSU, Auburn, and Stanford. Bama wasn't there. Anyone here that doesn't think we were the best of those by January needs to go back and re-watch the Rose Bowl and NC game. Even last year, by Saban's own admission, Alabama wasn't motivated in the CFP. We caught them when they were extremely motivated with an NFL front 7. That's not going to happen every year, we just caught it when it was. Who knows how we would have fared against Clemson, Oklahoma, or someone else, but I think that is largely part of the point of the OP.

Yep.

Coker had all day to throw and Cook didn't. That basically won the game for Bama.