Cry Me a River

Michigan is in the Sugar Bowl.  It was announced Sunday night that they will be playing Virginia Tech.  I thought most people knew this was a foregone conclusion (Michigan in the Sugar) after they beat OSU?  Sure, some things could have happened to keep them out but it was always more likely than not they would be selected.

This post is not a shot at my fellow blogger as he hasn't been bitching to me (yet) but more generally the whining and complaining throughout the internet and elsewhere.  Michigan State fans are crying foul.  Of course, all of the arguments I read are delusional, misinformed and illogical.  Starting with Kirk Cousins:

"Michigan sat home tonight on the couch and watched us," the senior said shortly after the game's conclusion. "We played our hearts out — you saw it. I don't see how you get punished for playing and someone else gets to sit on the couch and get what they want.
"If this is the way the system is, I guess it's a broken system."

Michigan's Ryan VanBergen responded appropriately already...

"If he wants to go sit on a couch and watch us play in the Big Ten championship game, then he can do that," Van Bergen said. "They had an opportunity to go the Rose Bowl. It was sitting right in front of them for them to grab. They didn't seize the opportunity.
"I think that they'll do well in the Outback Bowl. Best of luck. Best wishes. We're going to the Sugar Bowl, and we're excited about it."

So where Kirk left off, Spartans have jumped in to carry the banner.  They are clearly cry babies, just like Cousins.

First, let me explain one little fact that most miss in this argument.  Other than the BCS National Championship game, the BCS is not designed to reward teams in any sort of playoff system.  It ranks teams.  It's sole purpose is to find the two best teams to pair up for a one game playoff to determine the national champion.  There are all sorts of problems with this system, but let's save that argument for another day.  This discussion is about the rest of the bowls, which are independent entities out for profit.  The BCS provides some parameters with which these bowls must select, and of course the bowls want to create the best matchups to make money and sell tickets.  So any argument about another team "deserving" a BCS bowl (other than the Championship game) are missing the point to begin with.  Teams are not selected solely on merit!  Everyone should know and expect this outcome every season.

Just for fun, let's assume for a second that BCS bowls were required to select teams solely on merit.  Who deserves to be in a BCS game more, Michigan or MSU?

MSU finished ranked 17th in the final BCS poll, Michigan finished 13th.  For a team to be selected for an at large bid, they must be ranked in the top 14.  So for you math majors, MSU is not even eligible for a BCS bid.

The next argument is that the BCS is a flawed system because Michigan is ranked ahead of MSU.  "The Spartans should not be punished for making their league's championship game!"  is the doozy Cousins first stated and the one I keep reading.

This is clearly illogical.  The Spartans moved down in the rankings because they lost a game.  Should the Big Ten championship game's results not factor into bowl seeding?  Or does a win count for the winning team but a loss doesn't count against the loser?  MSU earned the right to play in the Big Ten Championship, all they had to do to make the Rose Bowl was win the game.  They failed to do so and suffered the consequences of a loss. The game matters just like any other game throughout the season matters. 


"But Michigan State beat Michigan head-to-head!"

This is 100% true.  It also fails to encompass the entire season of each team.  Michigan finished 10-2, MSU 10-3.  Michigan pummeled Nebraska, who pummeled Sparty.  Michigan beat Notre Dame, who beat MSU.  The transitive property never means anything in sports, but the point is that teams play drastically different from week to week.  Head to head matchups tell us who the best team was on a given Saturday, but body of work should be included in determining who the best team is overall. 

So let's take a critical look at body of work.(color coded to show the advantage in each category)


First MSU:
10-3

5 wins over bowl teams

Opponent record = 82-75 (MSU played FCS Youngstown State who finished with a 6-5 record) (MSU also played Wisconsin twice, thus the 12 more total games played)

Record of opponents they beat = 55-66

Best Wins: Wisconsin, Michigan

Losses: @Notre Dame, @Nebraska, neutral site Wisconsin

Score vs Common Opponents: 153-138

Total Defense: 5th (273 yards per game)

Scoring Defense: 9th (17.46 ppg)

Total Offense: 60th (390 yards per game)

Scoring Offense: 39th (30.8 ppg)

For Michigan:
10-2

8 wins over bowl teams

Overall opponent record = 82-63

Record of opponents they beat = 66-54

Best Wins: Nebraska, Notre Dame

Losses: @MSU, @Iowa

Score vs Common Opponents 250-158

Total Defense: 18th (318 yards per game) 

Scoring Defense: 7th (17.17 ppg) 

Total Offense: 30th (435 yards per game)

Scoring Offense: 23rd (34.2 ppg)


Now I know my esteemed colleague says he doesn't like statistics, but I feel this is a pretty slam dunk case above that Michigan played a more difficult schedule and played better within that schedule than the Spartans.  The head to head matchup certainly matters, but the rest of the evidence matters as well. 

All this boils down to one simple little fact;
Michigan is more deserving of a BCS bid than the Spartans.

Keep eatin'