Did this year take the shine off winning a B1G title for you?

Submitted by Wee-Bey Brice on

The four best Big Ten East coaches right here pic.twitter.com/DraYfKaakS

— PSU got robbed* (@drunkzanjo) December 2, 2016

This is a standard troll post but it did make me think.

  • 2015: 3rd best team in the B1G hoists the trophy, gains credibility.
  • 2016: exact same result. 

For me, this year really took some of the luster off of winning the damn thing. I wanted to win it for the tradition and to solidify M's return but at the same time, I feel that PSU holding up that trophy undermines the idea. Just like MSU holding it up last year did.

So while I want to win it for the sake of winning it, I no longer feel it means you're the supreme ruler of the conference. It's really more about catching the right breaks throughout the season. As simple as "were you lucky enough?" Michigan had every ingredient to be conf champs except luck. That was afforded to someone else, again.

So if you don't have to be the best team to win it and you don't have to win it to go to the CFP, why does it matter at all?

DairyQueen

December 9th, 2016 at 2:02 PM ^

Agreed. And as we rise further, the hate will simply pile on.

I still don't understand why we don't acknowledge that the Big Ten Championship Game was created in 2011 to, despite what the Big Ten officials will claim, give a "BCS bump" for the top Big Ten team.

And since this year was no outlier, there is the same probablity every year to have what happened this year--2 best teams in the conference kept out & the Champ is completely irrelavant to the CFP--happen again next year.

umich1

December 9th, 2016 at 8:48 AM ^

We had every ingredient except Darboh catching the damn football @ Iowa and @ OSU late in those games, or picking up enough on first or second down running the ball to close those games out.

You make your own luck. We didn't. Next year, hopefully we will.

Of course I want to win the B1G. Congratulations to the teams over the past 10+ years that have gotten it done. Hopefully our day will come soon.

Tuebor

December 9th, 2016 at 10:39 AM ^

The officials had nothing to do with our running backs getting less than two and half yards per carry on 38 carries.  Or the fact that we had the most dynamic player in the country and the coaching staff only let him run two different plays.

 

OLine play needs to start improving and fast.

CalifExile

December 9th, 2016 at 1:40 PM ^

The refs had quite a bit to do with PI being called to OSU's advantage on an uncatchable ball and no PI call when Perry was mugged. Our team made a lot of good plays and too many bad plays. So did OSU. Many of the bad plays were caused by good plays on the part of the other team. The difference in the final score was the bad calls by the refs. You shouldn't have to beat your opponent and the refs to win the game.

mi93

December 9th, 2016 at 12:27 PM ^

This year proves you don't have to win the conference to have a shot at the national title - and I'm okay with that.  How many MBB tournament winners win their conference or their conference tournament?  Certainly not all of them.  And sometimes the breaks don't work out in season.  Shorter season, yeah, but a playoff is about the best teams.

I get conference pride, etc., but as a fan, I never sit around with friends talking about who won the B1G in past years.  If we're talking college football nostalgia, it's nationally, who won the title, who coulda/woulda/shoulda.

Personal preference.

EastCoast Esq.

December 9th, 2016 at 8:48 AM ^

I have to disagree. I despise Penn state and I don't think they're actually very good, but they beat OSU and only lost a single conference game. They earned the title.

If OSU had won that game or if we had beaten a mediocre Iowa team, Penn state wouldn't have been in the championship. But neither of us stepped up when we had to and Penn state did, so this is the result.

The B1G title isn't the biggest crown with the NC out there, but this year doesn't change anything.



Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad

Wee-Bey Brice

December 9th, 2016 at 8:57 AM ^

They absolutely earned it, by rule. I just dont think they're one of the two best teams in the conf and that's my gripe for the second year in a row. Of course they got there by beating one, but that's where luck comes in (on a ST play returned for TD, like MSU vs M 2015). I would even add the officiating in the M/OSU game in the luck category for them. But thats my point, not saying we didnt have our chances, just so many things have to work in your favor other than just you being a good football team. 

Pepto Bismol

December 9th, 2016 at 9:23 AM ^

Penn State won the games on the field and earned the right to represent the division.  If that's not good enough, why even play the games? 

 

PSU is not the same team we crushed in week 4.  Our defense remains better than theirs, but their offense is humming, where ours sputtered out and essentially lost us our two games.

Penn State scored 41 points against Iowa.  45 against MSU.  45 on Indiana.  28 on OSU.  And a whopping 38 points against Wisconsin on a neutral field.  Those are probably the 5 best defenses we played all year.  Michigan didn't come anywhere near that production.

 

I know everybody here closed the book on PSU after 49-10, but if you did, that was a huge mistake.  Penn State is a very good team that took major steps forward since September, won the conference and deserves everything they're getting. 

That doesn't take the shine off of the Big Ten title, it takes the shine off of our 2016 season.  

gmoney41

December 9th, 2016 at 9:47 AM ^

Like I said many many times, we would crush PSU 10 out of 10 games.  I have watched them on their cute little run and I haven't been convinced that they are nothing more than a very average team.  A lot like Iowa of last year.  The big ten title is meaningless to me until they fix the divisional disparity.  This year was a glorified 3rd place game with a cute trophy for the winner.  Sorry, Penn St sucks, and they could try their arm punting bs offense against us and it would get shut down quick.

gmoney41

December 9th, 2016 at 11:08 AM ^

Ok Brady.  The Iowa win was nice, but OSU was flukey as hell and Wisconsin scored 31 pts on em and let PSU arm punt their way to that win.  We would beat PSu at home, on a neutral field, or in their place 10 out of 10 games. I'll double down and say that they are a shit team, and they will get destroyed by USC.  I can't believe people are defending these clowns.   

Mediocracy3

December 9th, 2016 at 1:08 PM ^

that the Iowa win was a solid get for them. Also, the OSU win was really some lucky shit that bounced PSU's way (like you said). I watched some of that game and it looked to me as if OSU was dominating the game from start to ugly finish. I think that UM, OSU and PSU tied for first place in the B1G east... We beat PSU, PSU beat OSU and then OSU beat us - That's a tie. 

Tuebor

December 9th, 2016 at 10:00 AM ^

They were also lucky that Harbaugh decided to call a horrible offensive game against Iowa.  Michigan should have won that game by 20+ and instead he believed his own lie about wilton speight being a heisman candidate and kept dialing up deep passes off of play action without a run game to make Iowa bite. 

umfanchris

December 9th, 2016 at 9:02 AM ^

It doesn't matter if we are the better team (we are), but Penn St earned it. Even though we crushed them, they did 2 things we couldn't do, Beat Iowa and Beat Ohio. We left multiple plays on the field (especially in the Iowa game). Had they came through on even a couple of those plays, then maybe we are B1G champ.

Blue and Joe

December 9th, 2016 at 8:49 AM ^

No, winning the B1G should always be a goal. The situation this year where the two best teams didn't play in the game was very unusual. That doesn't diminish it for me. Strange things happen sometimes.

mGrowOld

December 9th, 2016 at 8:50 AM ^

Had we won it we'd be in the final four.  Yes OSU went without winning it but if we had won it that means we've beaten OSU and Wisconsin (again) we're a 2nd seed in the tourny and preparing to play Clemson.

So yes - it matters.

Wee-Bey Brice

December 9th, 2016 at 9:02 AM ^

I should have worded it better, MGrow. I, agree, it matters. But when people are using conf titles to justify what team belongs where and what coaches are actually good or better than others at coaching, conf titles don't seem like a good barometer. It feels like something cool to win that doesnt actually tell the story. 

ST3

December 9th, 2016 at 12:50 PM ^

Luck is involved in every game of chance. That's part of what makes the game so interesting. If the better, more talented team won every time, there would be no reason to watch the game. Think of it this way, if luck was not involved in sports, there would have been no Miracle on Ice in 1980. The pro games like basketball, baseball and hockey try to remove luck from the equation by playing 7 game series. I don't really get interested in those until they get to close-out games.

EDIT: You all know by now that I'm obsessed with the offensive line this year. I've conceded that they were mediocre. However, as part of my research, I went through the boxscores to see how many bad snaps we had this year. You would expect that with a position switch, first-time starter at center (Cole moving from LT to C) there might be a few bad snaps here and there. This is what I discovered.

Michigan fumbled 13 times this year. We only lost 5 of them. Speight led the team with 3 fumbles. Hill and Evans were next with 2. Of Speight's fumbles, one was when he got hit passing against CU. One was on a 2 yard sack against Iowa. I don't remember that one, but the play-by-play called it a sack, recovered by Higdon. That could have been a bad center/QB exchange, or just a sack. I don't remember. Nevertheless, we recovered. So the only fumbled snap out of 870 offensive plays was when we were at the 1 yard line against OSU. I think our offensive line was fine. I think the universe just consprired to f*ck us over this year. Bollocks.

jmblue

December 9th, 2016 at 8:53 AM ^

When we have 14 teams and play nine conference games, it definitely doesn't mean the same as before.  I doubt OSU fans care about it right now.

 

Zenogias

December 9th, 2016 at 11:19 AM ^

I still want to win one, obviously, but I hate the fact that schedule strength is so disparate and that there's an extra coin flip at the end. I love the way basketball does it. The B1G champ is the regular season winner, the team that was the best team over the long haul. There's still unfortunate strength of schedule issues, but it's far more likely that the team that wins is the most deserving.

Moonlight Graham

December 9th, 2016 at 8:55 AM ^

Your OP is an emotional reaction to a rather clever troll-job that is currently undeniably valid. NO, the shine is not off winning the Big Ten, we need to win one. A stupid, stupid question. Jesus Christ I don't usually get this worked up about stuff on this board but this has to stop. 

If we win the Orange Bowl, Harbaugh will be 21-5 with a BCS/NY6 bowl win and a second-tier NYD bowl win (Citrus), 1-1 vs. MSU, 0-2 vs. OSU. 

(Massive caveats apply regarding the Fickel year here, but...) Brady Hoke 2011-12 was 19-7 with a BCS/NY6 bowl win and a second-tier NYD bowl loss (Outback), 1-1 vs. MSU, 1-1 vs. OSU. 

We lose the Orange Bowl, the margin becomes thinner. We need to start winning CHAMPIONSHIPS. Yes we got fucked on some calls in the OSU game and yes PSU and OSU got some lucky circumstances, as did MSU last year. We can use those "excuses" to some extent but let's not use the one that says "the Big Ten Championship doesn't matter anyway." Of COURSE it fucking does.

Wee-Bey Brice

December 9th, 2016 at 9:09 AM ^

I think your reaction is much more emotional than mine and I didn't even think the troll job was that clever hence "this is a standard troll post". But anyway, like I said to MGrowOld, I should have worded it better. Of course the goal is to win it, it just doesnt mean the same thing to me as it would had the best teams actually won the last cpl years. We overanalyze depth charts all offseason because we think that matters but there are more factors than just being good at play. Best team didnt win it last year, didnt win it this year. So why judge coaches/programs based on it? We can agree to disagree...

LKLIII

December 9th, 2016 at 10:31 AM ^

I don't think the first two year comparison between Hoke & Harbaugh is apt. We went 11-1 and everybody knew that was a record based on luck. Same with our selection into the Sugar Bowl. Year 2 we had a worse record and lost in a worse bowl game. The trajectory is the opposite. We expect a down 3rd year next year due to youth. If we also have a down year in year 4 your comparison might be valid, but if we end up doing better than expected next year despite youth (9-3 or 10-2) and then get another 10+ win in season 4 once the kids have matured a bit, your comparison will totally fall apart. It's just way too soon to tell for sure, but early signs are this is a totally different ball club.



Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad

philclar

December 9th, 2016 at 8:54 AM ^

Agreed. I'd rather be in the playoff with a chance to win the NC. I thought that conference championships were the first playoff, but that's not the case. Winning the conference is just not that important because it doesn't walk hand in hand with the NC. 

gmoney41

December 9th, 2016 at 9:54 AM ^

Michigan Osu was the first playoff game this year.  At the end of the day, if I was a PSU fan, I would be happy to not be Alabama's whipping boy this year, as they clearly would be.