Spartans enter into football series with other state schools

“‘I firmly believe Michigan State is the university of this state,’ he said.”

This is why Mark Hollis is the man!

hahaha good that he thinks that…too bad nobody else does

Matt
08/20/09 @ 11:20pm

hahaha good that he thinks that…too bad nobody else does

Then why are you reading the state news nuff nuff?

AMEN to that Matt2. Matt is yet another pathetic scUM troll.

Michigan was holding those dates open for Baker College, University of Wisconsin-Whitewater, and Sisters of the Poor.

Cool. I’ve been to quite a few MSU away football games. This will be 3 more stadiums I’ll get the chance to see.

That Valente guy (a Spartan grad) was trashing this deal on 97.1 in Detroit the other day (because of the road games), but I like it. It will be great to see MSU come into those other venues. It will be a great atmosphere on those campuses and the stadiums will have a strong Spartan presence. As far as giving those teams a leg up with home field; if we can’t win at their place then we’re probably going to have trouble winning on the road in the Big Ten anyway so we won’t be missing out on any national implications.

whoops, I’m Matt4 ^^^^^^

I read this story on Freep.com too. Some people (the U of M fans) comment by listing national rankings of undergrad schools from Forbes or USNews Report. Haha just thought I would post the link.

http://freep.com/article/20090821/BLOG05/90821016/1055/SPORTS07/Does-the-true-university-of-Michigan-wear-green-and-white?

I support Athletic Director Mark Hollis’ rationale about playing schools of our same state. The deal is about playing football. That’s it. Go green! Go white! Go State!

I thought the rationale when we first started playing them was that it would always be at home because that way we’d make a decent amount of money for playing them. If we’re playing there then we lose that financial incentive so now we’re just playing a crappy team (no offense intended) for nothing.

I guess i’m missing what the benefit for MSU is? Would appreciate an explination if someone has it.

Hmm, in response to your question: The second paragraph says the series “is designed to help the state of Michigan economically, while energizing alumni of the four schools.” Is that a good enough explanation for you? It’s not just to help MSU, but different areas of the state. MSU will bring a lot of fans to these games and help out other areas of Michigan besides just EL. And these schools’ alumni and fans are pumped to have such a big program coming to their campus, and State fans are excited (at least I am) to go to a campus they’ve never been before, that’s also close enough to go to the game, and cheer on their team away from home. Do you need a further explanation?

I’m glad you’re personally excited and yes, obviously it will help the other MI schools financially. I guess i’d just rather see MSU play some better teams which may help us improve more than the smaller MI schools and would bring in more money for MSU. Yes, thats not in Western Michigan’s interest or the other small MI schools but it’s probably better for MSU, which, is what our Athletic Department should have as their primary focus.

If this plan is the best option for MSU then great, if not than we should be doing something else.

RE Jason – I’m all for doing things to benefit MSU and make us some money and get more national attention for our football program. And the Athletice Department is doing just that with the deals with Alabama and West Virginia. Plus our ongoing series with Notre Dame gives us a national audience each year (which has worked out very well in our favor lately!). If the AD wasn’t doing things like this and was just trying to help the rest of the state, then I would feel the same way you do. But they seem to be doing a good job getting us big name opponents lined up for the future, so I have no problem with them doing stuff like this to help other schools in the state.

I don’t think this is good at all. MSU won’t move up in the rankings and pull any extra votes playing cupcakes like Western Michigan. I want to see MSU play more SEC teams like Kentucky, South Carolina, Georgia, Auburn, Florida, Arkansas, and Ole Miss. I like how they scheduled Alabama. The SEC is recognized as the toughest and best conference in college football and it would only benefit MSU to schedule SEC opponents, even if they are middle of the pack SEC teams, they would help us look good on paper and establish a better ranking. A Big Ten schedule is not enough anymore, considering the majority of the country looks at the Big Ten as a weak conference (not to mention, the Big Ten gets pounded annually in the Rose Bowl). This is why MSU was not even in the Top 25 AP preseason rankings even though they had a respectable season last year. MSU please schedule more quality teams.

Dont get me wrong, I think the AD Mark Holis (sp?) has done a great job and is a great guy, i just think John Joseph summed up what I was trying to get out there. Helping other MI schools is great but not if its at the expense of MSU’s program.
I guess i just feel like we could do better. But i’m sure they had some good reasons.

Those of you who think that this is a bad deal for MSU are wrong because this is great for us.

First of all, by playing other in-state schools MSU saves tons of money in travel expenses.
Second, Hollis is keeping MSU playing in the state with the most alumni, Michigan.
Third, everybody talks about the MSU-UM rivalry but no one talks about the rivalries that exist within families and other people in the state with these universities (MSU, CMU, EMU, WMU).
Fourth, these games are appealing to fans (buyers) because they don’t take place very often.
Fifth, it is great for the state of Michigan because the money spent is kept in the state.
Sixth, it keeps the level of MSU’s schedule pretty high considering that these MAC schools have decent and good football teams.
Seventh, this series is good for public relations and sends a message, once again, that, as Hollis said, MSU is the University of the State.
Finally, there must be many more positive reasons. And, this series is not a sacrifice for MSU because these teams are good and its not like we’re playing App. State or something.

…matter only if there is another team with the same record. If MSU goes 12-0 (or 11-1) with schedules that inlcude WMU, CMU, or EMU, does anyone seriously think that will compromise the team’s chances for a top bowl? That the voters/ computers will take a 10-2 team just because their schedule was “tougher”?

So we want to be like other perennial top teams…they must play “tough” schedules, right? Let’s look at their 2009 slates:

Florida? Troy, Charleston Southern, Florida International.
Alabama? Florida International (again), Tennessee-Chatanooga, North Texas.
Texas? Central Florida and UTEP.

They seem to do just fine come December when air and hotel reservations are being made, even with opponents as feared as these.

Typo—s/b “include”—beggin’ your pardon. Chattanooga is probably wrong, too, but I don’t have the desire to look it up.

And, I did look up USC, which is the counter-example to my list, and their non-conference schedule looks pretty good: San Jose State, Ohio State, and Notre Dame. Maybe you will grant me that in this case, the exception proves the rule.

John Jacob and others, you do realize schools do get more than 1 OOC game per year, correct? That being said, Western and Central are decent mid-level programs. We will always have a series with ND, who should get back to a respectable program sooner rather than later. That still leaves 2 games! The problem with most of the SEC is they will not do a home and home. Some will gladly play MSU down south, however they will not return the favor…… especially in the colder months. The PAC- 10 is pretty good with homes and homes though.

Yes, its one less home game as far as money goes, but I’d rather see them play in-state, than play a FCS school.

• John Joseph – sorry

When I heard about this series I didn’t think that it was true. I don’t see how this will benefit MSU in any way, except some good PR in Mid-Michigan. Financially this will be a loser, with giving up three home games and the revenue associated. The only way it isn’t a financial loser is if the three schools are taking substatially reduced guarantee payments to come to MSU, to get the one home game.

Competition wise, it wasn’t long ago that all three schools were dismal and EMU is still dismal. By the time MSU gets around to traveling around the state, they could be playing some bad teams. If CMU and WMU are still decent when they get MSU at home, that could lead to some potentially emberassing losses, which will not help recruiting.

As for the argument that is made that it keeps the money spent in Michigan, I don’t get it. I’m guessing that they would have played these road games against the same oponents at home and last I checked East Lansing is still in Michigan.

This series has only downside potential for MSU.