Not trying beat a dad horse but even Richard Cross agrees with me...

[BogeyGolfer]

Who you play in a bowl game does matter. Will beating Rice be a bigger win than Ole Miss? Was beating Michigan a bigger win than beating Ole Miss in 2010? If we were to play and beat a team like GT in a bowl game it is a much better win and would give us much more momentum in the off season... Ive accepted the fact that we are playing a below average team but I still don't understand the argument that it doesn't matter who we play or wanting to play a shitty team just to get a cheap bowl victory.

[hacker]

oh come on

[ShotgunDawg]

Who you play in a bowl game does matter. Will beating Rice be a bigger win than Ole Miss? Was beating Michigan a bigger win than beating Ole Miss in 2010? If we were to play and beat a team like GT in a bowl game it is a much better win and would give us much more momentum in the off season... Ive accepted the fact that we are playing a below average team but I still don't understand the argument that it doesn't matter who we play or wanting to play a shitty team just to get a cheap bowl victory.

Bogey, I disagree and the one point in which I will contend is:

It doesn't matter who we play in the bowl game because I'm not sure we can have anymore momentum going into next season than we already do. The main thing is that we need to win our bowl game so that our momentum remains throughout the offseason.

With the momentum we have going right now, beating Georgia Tech wouldn't do us any more good than beating Rice. The main we need to do is win.

[CJDAWG85]

So a 10 win Rice team is a below average team?

[preachermatt83]

Bogey, I'm not disagreeing with your greater point, but the one point in which I will contend is:

It doesn't matter who we play in the bowl game because I'm not sure we can have anymore momentum going into next season than we already do. The main thing is that we need to win our bowl game so that our momentum remains throughout the offseason.

With the momentum we have going right now, beating Georgia Tech wouldn't do us any more good than beating Rice. The main we need to do is win.

Shotgun preaching the TRUTH!!

[preachermatt83]

So a 10 win Rice team is a below average team?

Those that think that are gonna be sadly mistaken. We will have our hands full. I think they are on par with Bowling Green.

[CJDAWG85]

I'm not saying they are an elite team, but they certainly aren't below average.


As for the momentum, let's say we play a really good game and win by something like 48-14. Kinda hard to say we have less momentum over the Bears who win by something like 24-20.

[Gen. Grant]

What about the mom horse?**

[Coach34]

Not trying beat a dad horse but even Richard Cross agrees with me .

If you're agreeing with Dick Cross- you need to examine your position most of the time.

[smootness]

Who you play in a bowl game does matter. Will beating Rice be a bigger win than Ole Miss? Was beating Michigan a bigger win than beating Ole Miss in 2010? If we were to play and beat a team like GT in a bowl game it is a much better win and would give us much more momentum in the off season... Ive accepted the fact that we are playing a below average team but I still don't understand the argument that it doesn't matter who we play or wanting to play a shitty team just to get a cheap bowl victory.

Agreed, because beating Michigan in a bowl game led to an all-time great offseason for Mississippi State****************

[Johnson85]

Who you play in a bowl game does matter. Will beating Rice be a bigger win than Ole Miss? Was beating Michigan a bigger win than beating Ole Miss in 2010? If we were to play and beat a team like GT in a bowl game it is a much better win and would give us much more momentum in the off season... Ive accepted the fact that we are playing a below average team but I still don't understand the argument that it doesn't matter who we play or wanting to play a shitty team just to get a cheap bowl victory.

Beating a weaker, but bigger name team is generally better than beating a team from a non-BCS conference, even if the non-BCS conference team is pretty good. But it's really not a big difference. Playing and beating a Michigan, Ohio State, Texas, type team is something people will remember even you caught them on a down year, but nobody is going to remember that we beat Wake Forest two years ago any more than people will remember that Ole Miss beat Ga Tech in two years, although Ga Tech obviously has a little more cachet than Wake.

[preachermatt83]

What about the mom horse?**

HAHA!!

[Thick]

Who you play in a bowl game does matter. Will beating Rice be a bigger win than Ole Miss? Was beating Michigan a bigger win than beating Ole Miss in 2010? If we were to play and beat a team like GT in a bowl game it is a much better win and would give us much more momentum in the off season... Ive accepted the fact that we are playing a below average team but I still don't understand the argument that it doesn't matter who we play or wanting to play a shitty team just to get a cheap bowl victory.

Quit telling people that you and Dick agree on anything!

[fishwater99]

If you're agreeing with Dick Cross- you need to examine your position most of the time.

+1

[Tbonewannabe]

If you're agreeing with Dick Cross- you need to examine your position most of the time.

+10000000

[Political Hack]

Agreed, because beating Michigan in a bowl game led to an all-time great offseason for Mississippi State****************

that's painfully funny.

Just win the damn game and get to 2014.

[MidTNDawg]

Using Richard Cross to bolster your position?

Well, I suppose that will garner a lot of points here.

[Dawgtini]

Amen!

[Goat Holder]

You are wrong. Put simply, it really does not matter. Unless you are in the BCS Championship game. And even that really doesn't equate to shit the following year. Sure, it sucked for Oregon to lose the 2010 game but they still got tons of recognition for just being there and continued to build their program. On the other hand, Auburn....

Richard Cross is going to have the opinion that passively aggressively paints MSU in a bad light. And you ate it up like a good bulldog that is in their place. You are pathetic and exactly what is wrong with our fanbase.

[Schultzy]

Do you even remember who beat who in the natl championship game two years ago?

[drunkernhelldawg]

I do think it was great to beat Michigan. I personally like playing teams we haven't played much before. However, losing to a team we're favored over in the bowl game does reflect badly on us. It happens to a lot of teams, though, so it's not actually that big a deal. The main thing is to keep everything positive and show the great heart of our football program to the world. And to have fun. I guess there's a little extra pressure since the game if for a winning season, but next season will be what matters before the middle of January.

One horrible and ironic thing that happened in a bowl was the Peach Bowl when we won 10 games for the first time but our team lost all discipline in the last five minutes and racked up penalty after penalty. We still got that historic tenth win, but the shit at the end of the game dampened the party in a big, long-lasting way.

[messageboardsuperhero]

Richard Cross is going to have the opinion that passively aggressively paints MSU in a bad light.

Amen.

If UM and State were to flip positions, Cross would be preaching about how the Liberty Bowl and Music City Bowl are on the same level, and that although Rice isn't a big name, they are just as good as GT (which I believe is true). Cross will say ANYTHING to make UM look just a little bit better than State.

When you are in lower tier bowls like the LB and MCB, no team you play is going to make you look significantly better or worse. Just win the game.

[messageboardsuperhero]

And you really can't compare UM's game with GT to our game with Michigan in 2010.

The prestige associated with playing Michigan in a NYD bowl (and winning by 40) is MUCH higher than the notoriety someone gains from playing GT in the MCB.

[BulldogBear]

Beating GT is a "better" win than beating Rice. That is a true statement if taken strictly at face value. But Ole Miss/MSU beating anybody in a lower tier bowl while the other does the same changes little if any perception already in place from Egg Bowl. It simply doesn't outweight it, doesn't undo the damage, and doesn't make any statement not already made on the videoboard score column from the Egg Bowl. We're not talking about about Indepence vs. Outback here. If we so much as beat Rice there's little they can do to GT that will override what happened at the 3 yard lijne North endzone on Thanksgiving in Starkpatch.

[Barking 13]

I heard all of that... the funny thing about H2H today was all the callers from OM were in full meltdown.. about Freezus' play calling, red zone efficiency, etc.. I was LMAO

[HoopsDawg]

Of course it matters. It's silly to argue other wise.

[K9 Avenger]

Rice just may be BETTER than Ga Tech..... the yellow jackets are terrible.

[gravedigger]

Bogey, I think Richard was making the point that it matters sometimes and other times doesn't. The egg bowl victory does matter more when the bowl opponent is pitt, or rice or wake forest. But at times when it's Michigan, or Oklahoma State in the cotton bowl, or Clemson in the Chick fil a, the bowl game is bigger.

I do agree we should not play the EASIEST non conference schedule we possibly can. I Also think we should not schedule an Oklahoma State, or Texas, or USC for a non con game because it's not necessary to play that level of competition on top of our conference.

There has to be a medium and if I'm stating this wrong, I apologize, but I think the non con opponents should be this mixture:

1 swac like team from in state
1 directional school from close by
1 Tulane type team that allows us to play home and home but fans don't mind traveling to
1 lower tier major conference school like wake forest, Kansas, Illinois, Indiana, Duke, Maryland KNOWING FULL WELL THEY COULD END UP BEING GOOD THAT YEAR.

The lower tier major conference school game should follow the swac like team early in the year. The Tulane type team should be homecoming or swap with the lower tier major conference school game. The directional school should be later in the year, say end of October, to break up the conference schedule or even early November.

The Bama game and OM game should be in November every year. Those are the games we need the most emotion in.

So my perfect schedule would be:

Jackson State
Tulane
Kentucky
LSU
Vandy
Arkansas
Texas A&M
Indiana (homecoming)
Auburn
South Alabama
Alabama
Ole Miss


My reason for not playing the EASIEST noncom schedule: Simply that I want to make the 4 team playoff in 2 situations. One if we win the SEC (automatic), and two if we somehow lose an sec game to someone and fail to make the championship game, but deserve to be in the final 4. THIS WILL NOT HAPPEN if we play the 4 easiest teams possible to schedule. We will leave the door open to be excluded even if the loss is to bama who wins the SEC. LSU wouldn't be eliminated. Auburn wouldn't be. A&M wouldn't be due to markets and national popularity. But MSU, OM and Arkansas would be.

I want the chance of that eliminated if the last criterion is the strength of the noncom schedule, which it will be due to TV pressure, in the coming years.

We can all scream truthfully to the high heavens about the SEC schedule being enough, and it is, as long as you run the table or win the conference. But we need to position ourselves to make the final four even if we dont.

[hells bells]

I refer to Richard as Dick. Need I say more?

[Dawgbite]

I refer to Richard as Dick. Need I say more?

Doesn't everybody?

[BogeyGolfer]

You are wrong. Put simply, it really does not matter. Unless you are in the BCS Championship game. And even that really doesn't equate to shit the following year. Sure, it sucked for Oregon to lose the 2010 game but they still got tons of recognition for just being there and continued to build their program. On the other hand, Auburn....

Richard Cross is going to have the opinion that passively aggressively paints MSU in a bad light. And you ate it up like a good bulldog that is in their place. You are pathetic and exactly what is wrong with our fanbase.

Bullshit, so our win against UCF was just as big as Michigan?? How did 2008 work out for us? My point is that we would feel a lot better about our season if we were to beat a team from a power conference. There is a reason a 10-3 team and conference champion is playing a 6-6 team. We play in the SEC and can beat a lot of bowl teams which would create even more excitement going into next year. As far as me being pathetic, 17 off...

[Jack Lambert]

Who you play in a bowl game does matter. Will beating Rice be a bigger win than Ole Miss? Was beating Michigan a bigger win than beating Ole Miss in 2010? If we were to play and beat a team like GT in a bowl game it is a much better win and would give us much more momentum in the off season... Ive accepted the fact that we are playing a below average team but I still don't understand the argument that it doesn't matter who we play or wanting to play a shitty team just to get a cheap bowl victory.

Another reason why Rice is a big game for us is because if we lose we have a losing record and if Ole Miss lose they still have a winning record. Now which one would you rather have an 6 and 7 team or an 7 and 6 team going into signing period? We have tried that GA Tech thing before and got beat both times. We need a win in the bowl game to have a winning record to carry into some kids home.

So if you want to be another dick just keep thinking like him.

By the way Ole Miss is going to get beat.

[BogeyGolfer]

Bogey, I think Richard was making the point that it matters sometimes and other times doesn't. The egg bowl victory does matter more when the bowl opponent is pitt, or rice or wake forest. But at times when it's Michigan, or Oklahoma State in the cotton bowl, or Clemson in the Chick fil a, the bowl game is bigger.

I do agree we should not play the EASIEST non conference schedule we possibly can. I Also think we should not schedule an Oklahoma State, or Texas, or USC for a non con game because it's not necessary to play that level of competition on top of our conference.

There has to be a medium and if I'm stating this wrong, I apologize, but I think the non con opponents should be this mixture:

1 swac like team from in state
1 directional school from close by
1 Tulane type team that allows us to play home and home but fans don't mind traveling to
1 lower tier major conference school like wake forest, Kansas, Illinois, Indiana, Duke, Maryland KNOWING FULL WELL THEY COULD END UP BEING GOOD THAT YEAR.

The lower tier major conference school game should follow the swac like team early in the year. The Tulane type team should be homecoming or swap with the lower tier major conference school game. The directional school should be later in the year, say end of October, to break up the conference schedule or even early November.

The Bama game and OM game should be in November every year. Those are the games we need the most emotion in.

So my perfect schedule would be:

Jackson State
Tulane
Kentucky
LSU
Vandy
Arkansas
Texas A&M
Indiana (homecoming)
Auburn
South Alabama
Alabama
Ole Miss


My reason for not playing the EASIEST noncom schedule: Simply that I want to make the 4 team playoff in 2 situations. One if we win the SEC (automatic), and two if we somehow lose an sec game to someone and fail to make the championship game, but deserve to be in the final 4. THIS WILL NOT HAPPEN if we play the 4 easiest teams possible to schedule. We will leave the door open to be excluded even if the loss is to bama who wins the SEC. LSU wouldn't be eliminated. Auburn wouldn't be. A&M wouldn't be due to markets and national popularity. But MSU, OM and Arkansas would be.

I want the chance of that eliminated if the last criterion is the strength of the noncom schedule, which it will be due to TV pressure, in the coming years.

We can all scream truthfully to the high heavens about the SEC schedule being enough, and it is, as long as you run the table or win the conference. But we need to position ourselves to make the final four even if we dont.

Grave, I agree would love to play a mid to lower tier team each year from a power conference.... I will not go watch us play South Alabama but I would go watch us play Indiana or Iowa St...

[preachermatt83]

Bogey, I think Richard was making the point that it matters sometimes and other times doesn't. The egg bowl victory does matter more when the bowl opponent is pitt, or rice or wake forest. But at times when it's Michigan, or Oklahoma State in the cotton bowl, or Clemson in the Chick fil a, the bowl game is bigger.

I do agree we should not play the EASIEST non conference schedule we possibly can. I Also think we should not schedule an Oklahoma State, or Texas, or USC for a non con game because it's not necessary to play that level of competition on top of our conference.

There has to be a medium and if I'm stating this wrong, I apologize, but I think the non con opponents should be this mixture:

1 swac like team from in state
1 directional school from close by
1 Tulane type team that allows us to play home and home but fans don't mind traveling to
1 lower tier major conference school like wake forest, Kansas, Illinois, Indiana, Duke, Maryland KNOWING FULL WELL THEY COULD END UP BEING GOOD THAT YEAR.

The lower tier major conference school game should follow the swac like team early in the year. The Tulane type team should be homecoming or swap with the lower tier major conference school game. The directional school should be later in the year, say end of October, to break up the conference schedule or even early November.

The Bama game and OM game should be in November every year. Those are the games we need the most emotion in.

So my perfect schedule would be:

Jackson State
Tulane
Kentucky
LSU
Vandy
Arkansas
Texas A&M
Indiana (homecoming)
Auburn
South Alabama
Alabama
Ole Miss


My reason for not playing the EASIEST noncom schedule: Simply that I want to make the 4 team playoff in 2 situations. One if we win the SEC (automatic), and two if we somehow lose an sec game to someone and fail to make the championship game, but deserve to be in the final 4. THIS WILL NOT HAPPEN if we play the 4 easiest teams possible to schedule. We will leave the door open to be excluded even if the loss is to bama who wins the SEC. LSU wouldn't be eliminated. Auburn wouldn't be. A&M wouldn't be due to markets and national popularity. But MSU, OM and Arkansas would be.

I want the chance of that eliminated if the last criterion is the strength of the noncom schedule, which it will be due to TV pressure, in the coming years.

We can all scream truthfully to the high heavens about the SEC schedule being enough, and it is, as long as you run the table or win the conference. But we need to position ourselves to make the final four even if we dont.


Yes!! A million times yes!!!!!!!!

[Political Hack]

beating Indiana doesn't get you in the BCS hunt. beating Bama, LSU, A&M, and Auburn does. We've got plenty enough chances to reach greatness stacked right in front of us by playing in the best division in the history of college football. Making things tougher is just dumb... we'll have our chances in conference.

[preachermatt83]

beating Indiana doesn't get you in the BCS hunt. beating Bama, LSU, A&M, and Auburn does. We've got plenty enough chances to reach greatness stacked right in front of us by playing in the best division in the history of college football. Making things tougher is just dumb... we'll have our chances in conference.

you lose to one sec opponent, which is gonna happen, having an Indiana or wake forest win on the schedule will help a ton.

[Coach34]

you lose to one sec opponent, which is gonna happen, having an Indiana or wake forest win on the schedule will help a ton.

help you do what?

[Political Hack]

help you do what?

help you have a weaker schedule than if you played bowling green.

[Todd4State]

you lose to one sec opponent, which is gonna happen, having an Indiana or wake forest win on the schedule will help a ton.

Here's the big issue with an Indiana or a Wake Forest- and I've said this before- I don't care how crappy a program is, a BCS team like Indiana, Wake Forest, Iowa State, etc. are going to only play us during the regular season if we do a home and home with them. So, if we were to play Indiana, we would have to go play them in Bloomington. I'm not worried about losing to them in Indiana, but the issue with that is we would lose a home game. We lose a home game, and we lose money, we lose a chance for recruits to visits, we lose money for the city, we lose money because we have to pay to transport the team and the MSU entourage (band, cheerleaders, athletic staff members, etc). A big part of our resurgence is the fact that we have consistently been playing 7 home games a year for the most part- with some exception. But seven home games is the goal for us. Playing someone like Indiana would make that more difficult.

And the fact of the matter is if we played Wake Forest, Indiana, or whomever- it would not draw any better or any worse than playing Louisiana Tech. As Hack said, it wouldn't help us nationally if we beat them. There's nothing for us to gain from it. Not to mention playing La Tech would be a lot cheaper and they would at worst do a 2 for 1 deal with us where we get 2 home game for 1 trip to Ruston.

The best way for everyone to be happy is to follow the manageable schedule plan and then you can see Michigan in a bowl, and see an "interesting" team in an environment that maximizes the benefit for MSU. When you play an Oklahoma State, odds are better that you are going to end up 6-6 and then you go to a lower tier bowl, which means you are more likely to play someone like Rice. If we played La Tech this year, we are 7-5 and I wouldn't have been surprised if we would have ended up in the Music City Bowl if that was indeed the case, and of course it would be MSU/GT instead of Ole Miss/GT. But hey! You got to see Oklahoma State, so those "interesting" team people should be happy.

[Todd4State]

The funny thing about Cross's argument- I would be willing to bet that Rice is better than the 6-6 Pittsburgh team that Ole Miss beat last year- and in a crappier bowl. But that didn't stop their momentum to landing the best recruiting class in the history of mankind.

[Political Hack]

playing rice will make us smarter. maybe playing GaTech will help legitimize their engineering program.

[Johnson85]

Do you even remember who beat who in the natl championship game two years ago?

Yes, but even for people that don't, I think they remember that teams played each other and who won. A lot of fans probably don't remember that UGA beat Hawaii in the Sugar Bowl (unless they were pissed that it was a shitty matchup), but I think fans do remember that Utah beat Alabama, even if they don't remember what bowl it was or what year it was. I think serious football fans probably remember that Miss. State beat the shit out of Michigan in a bowl game. Probably nobody remembers that we beat Wake Forrest. Nobody remembers that Crooms beat UCF. Nobody will remember if we beat Rice. Nobody will remember if UM beats Ga Tech.

[NewTweederEndzoneDance]

The funny thing about Cross's argument- I would be willing to bet that Rice is better than the 6-6 Pittsburgh team that Ole Miss beat last year- and in a crappier bowl. But that didn't stop their momentum to landing the best recruiting class in the history of mankind.

I think most everyone is missing the point simply because the original post mentioned Richard Cross. The point Bogey is trying to make is all about perception. It has nothing to do with the fact that Rice is probably better than Pitt was last year or GT is this year. The point is that beating either of those schools, which have more than 10 fans (seriously, did ya'll see that game last weekend? I think they had half of Rice's stadium tarped off, and it was for a championship), is always considered to be a better win than beating a team like Rice. Conversely, losing to Rice would be much much more damaging than losing to GT or Pitt, despite Rice probably having the better team.

As much as this board bitches about the Ole Miss spin, you'd think that we'd have learned by now that perception = reality a lot of the time. That's the same argument gravedigger is having about the scheduling - PERCEPTION.

[cubswillwinitonedaydawg]

I think he just meant that there should be some mid-level beatable BCS teams to pick from to play. Indiana was just an example. Our fans could make trips for certain Big 12, ACC, or AAC teams and if you schedule it right you could still have 7 home games a year. Just have your other 3 nonconference games at home when it's your turn to do the traveling part of a home-and-home. I personally would like to see a mid-road BCS team sometimes, rather than mostly all either top 10 teams (OSU) or SWAC or Sun-Belt schools. Check out our non-con schedule for the next couple years. Not much to look at. I fully understand the "we need to beat the SEC teams and that will give us recognition" argument. But we do have 4 non-conference games a year, and for the past few years the 4 have either been really tough (09 with GT and Houston, 2013 with OSU being a top 15 team and a 10-win Bowling Green), or really soft (2012 and 2014 with all cupcakes). Basically just throw in one beatable brand name a year. For the BCS team, we don't need the Ritz-Carlton, but I would prefer no Super 8 either. If I'm Scott I look at between 4-8 and 7-5 BCS teams and call one for a home and home.

[smootness]

I think most everyone is missing the point simply because the original post mentioned Richard Cross. The point Bogey is trying to make is all about perception. It has nothing to do with the fact that Rice is probably better than Pitt was last year or GT is this year. The point is that beating either of those schools, which have more than 10 fans (seriously, did ya'll see that game last weekend? I think they had half of Rice's stadium tarped off, and it was for a championship), is always considered to be a better win than beating a team like Rice. Conversely, losing to Rice would be much much more damaging than losing to GT or Pitt, despite Rice probably having the better team.

As much as this board bitches about the Ole Miss spin, you'd think that we'd have learned by now that perception = reality a lot of the time. That's the same argument gravedigger is having about the scheduling - PERCEPTION.

The problem is, nobody around the country cares about the Liberty Bowl or Music City Bowl or Compass Bowl, and they don't care who you play in those games. Whether we were playing GT in the MCB or Rice in the Liberty, nobody cares. People care about most of the BCS bowls (not even all of these) and maybe the CFA or Cotton or Cap. One depending. Once you get past that, it's just another filler bowl game; some people may watch some of it, but they'll forget about it within a day unless something crazy happens.

It's the same argument as scheduling Indiana in the OOC schedule. Nobody cares about Indiana, that's not considered a better win than beating Bowling Green or Rice.

[cubswillwinitonedaydawg]

Agree with this. Most people have no clue that Bowling Green and Rice were 10-win conference champs. Even ones that do will be quick to point out that they're in weak conferences. I might put money on Rice or Bowling Green to beat Georgia Tech. But perception-wise, better brand name gets more recognition than better team. For fans that follow football, they will recognize that a win over Rice or Bowling Green is very respectable. For the casual fan (probably 60-70% of fans), they won't recognize the name and will just assume a team like Rice or Bowling Green sucks since they don't know much about them and probably don't know what state they're in.

But we're bowling again. That's the main thing that matters.

[cubswillwinitonedaydawg]

Drop the Indiana. Let's make it TCU. Beatable now (they went 4-8), recognizable name, BCS school, close enough that some of our fans could go if it was a home and home. 2 things it accomplishes:
1. Solid out-of-conference win over a recognizable name. Good enough to not be a cupcake, but not so good that we shouldn't win the game (like Oklahoma St.). You could still schedule 3 other cupcakes and not end up on one of those "most laughable out-of-conference schedule" lists.
2. Davis Wade is about as full as it would be for an SEC game. I know more casual fans would be much more likely to go to watch MSU/TCU than MSU/Jackson St. or South Alabama.

[smootness]

Drop the Indiana. Let's make it TCU. Beatable now (they went 4-8), recognizable name, BCS school, close enough that some of our fans could go if it was a home and home. 2 things it accomplishes:
1. Solid out-of-conference win over a recognizable name. Good enough to not be a cupcake, but not so good that we shouldn't win the game (like Oklahoma St.). You could still schedule 3 other cupcakes and not end up on one of those "most laughable out-of-conference schedule" lists.
2. Davis Wade is about as full as it would be for an SEC game. I know more casual fans would be much more likely to go to watch MSU/TCU than MSU/Jackson St. or South Alabama.

We tried this with Georgia Tech, Oregon, and even Houston. Problem is, by the time we played them, they were freaking good and they beat us.

You can't guarantee what a team will look like 3 years down the road when these things are usually set up. TCU, with Gary Patterson at the helm, would be just as likely to be a top 15 team again by the time they came around as a 4-6 win team.

Heck, we even sort of tried it with Southern Miss (a lot of college football fans know they've been a good program); they won 12 games 2 years ago and almost made a BCS bowl. Now they've won 1 in the last 2 years and everybody is considering them one of the 'cupcakes' on our schedule that we need to avoid scheduling 4 of.

It's simply not that easy to try to set up schools who aren't too bad but also not too good.

[NewTweederEndzoneDance]

I think he just meant that there should be some mid-level beatable BCS teams to pick from to play. Indiana was just an example. Our fans could make trips for certain Big 12, ACC, or AAC teams and if you schedule it right you could still have 7 home games a year. Just have your other 3 nonconference games at home when it's your turn to do the traveling part of a home-and-home. I personally would like to see a mid-road BCS team sometimes, rather than mostly all either top 10 teams (OSU) or SWAC or Sun-Belt schools. Check out our non-con schedule for the next couple years. Not much to look at. I fully understand the "we need to beat the SEC teams and that will give us recognition" argument. But we do have 4 non-conference games a year, and for the past few years the 4 have either been really tough (09 with GT and Houston, 2013 with OSU being a top 15 team and a 10-win Bowling Green), or really soft (2012 and 2014 with all cupcakes). Basically just throw in one beatable brand name a year. For the BCS team, we don't need the Ritz-Carlton, but I would prefer no Super 8 either. If I'm Scott I look at between 4-8 and 7-5 BCS teams and call one for a home and home.

Not to mention, the entire point of that would be to get our brand out there on a wider level. It's easier to spread the brand by playing a home and home with NC State, Duke, Kansas, Baylor, etc... than it is playing Morgan State at home every year. We can spread the brand playing teams like Ok. State as well, but it helps to win the games.

[CJDAWG85]

If OKST hadn't choked against OU, then we played 4 conference champions this year. That's crazy.

[NewTweederEndzoneDance]

We tried this with Georgia Tech, Oregon, and even Houston. Problem is, by the time we played them, they were freaking good and they beat us.

You can't guarantee what a team will look like 3 years down the road when these things are usually set up. TCU, with Gary Patterson at the helm, would be just as likely to be a top 15 team again by the time they came around as a 4-6 win team.

Heck, we even sort of tried it with Southern Miss (a lot of college football fans know they've been a good program); they won 12 games 2 years ago and almost made a BCS bowl. Now they've won 1 in the last 2 years and everybody is considering them one of the 'cupcakes' on our schedule that we need to avoid scheduling 4 of.

It's simply not that easy to try to set up schools who aren't too bad but also not too good.

If the mid-level team happens to be good when we play them, then so be it. Let's win anyway. The point is not to schedule cupcakes. The point is to spread the brand that is MSU football, while also scheduling a winnable game. One of those teams being "up" when we play does not change the point of playing them, it's just bad luck.

[cubswillwinitonedaydawg]

If the mid-level team happens to be good when we play them, then so be it. Let's win anyway. The point is not to schedule cupcakes. The point is to spread the brand that is MSU football, while also scheduling a winnable game. One of those teams being "up" when we play does not change the point of playing them, it's just bad luck.

Agreed. And I like our chances against teams like GT, Houston, and West Virginia now as opposed to the Croom years or Dan's first year here. Heck, we had a 10-win Houston team with Case Keenum beat in 09 if not for a bogus call about Tyson Lee crossing the scrimmage line on a pass. I agree you can't tell the future and schedules are made out a few years in advance. But you can see who would probably be a mid-road BCS team and give it a shot and hope they don't turn into a powerhouse or pull a USM.

[CJDAWG85]

Agreed. And I like our chances against teams like GT, Houston, and West Virginia now as opposed to the Croom years or Dan's first year here. Heck, we had a 10-win Houston team with Case Keenum beat in 09 if not for a bogus call about Tyson Lee crossing the scrimmage line on a pass. I agree you can't tell the future and schedules are made out a few years in advance. But you can see who would probably be a mid-road BCS team and give it a shot and hope they don't turn into a powerhouse or pull a USM.

Or the phantom holding call on Dixon's 65 yd TD run in the 2nd Half.

[Coach34]

One problem you have is that other mid to lower level schools in the bigger conferences dont want a tough game OOC either.

Baylor played Wofford, Buffalo, and ULM in the OOC
K-State played N. Dakota State, ULL, and UMass
Texas Tech played SMU, Stephen F Austin, and Texas St
Kansas played South Dakota, Rice, and La Tech
Iowa played Iowa St, N. Illinois, W. Michigan, and Missouri St
Minnesota played UNLV, N. Mexico St, W. Illinois, and San Jose St
NC State played La Tech, Richmond, C. Michigan, and E. Carolina
Duke played Navy, Troy, NC Central, and Memphis

programs like ours that fight so hard to go bowling regularly- dont overschedule. It's not just us

[smootness]

If the mid-level team happens to be good when we play them, then so be it. Let's win anyway. The point is not to schedule cupcakes. The point is to spread the brand that is MSU football, while also scheduling a winnable game. One of those teams being "up" when we play does not change the point of playing them, it's just bad luck.

But you just said that part of the point is to schedule a winnable game. If the mid-level team happens to be good when we play them, then that makes the game much less winnable. That is what I'm saying. No one seems to want to schedule really good teams, everyone wants either a cupcake or a mediocre BCS conference team. Well, it's much easier to schedule cupcakes than it is mediocre BCS teams and avoid having them be really good by the time you play them.

Sure, it would be back luck, but that doesn't mean it wouldn't still hurt us.

[CJDAWG85]

The funny thing about seeing all of those OOC schedules is that a lot of people from other conferences complain about the SEC's OOC schedule.

[cubswillwinitonedaydawg]

Good point about other BCS schools being in the same boat. Probably hard to find a brand name team that is very beatable, at an attractive enough series and payout deal.
I just feel like there is room for out-of-conference scheduling improvement if it can be done.

Last 4 years and next year OOC:
Memphis, Alcorn St, Houston, UAB
Memphis, LA Tech, UAB, TN Martin
Jackson State, Troy, South AL, Middle TN
Oklahoma St, Alcorn St, Troy, Bowling Green
USM, UAB, South AL, TN Martin

Not many games to get our fanbase pumped about. 1 BCS opponent in 5 years, and that opponent was a top 15 opponent in the first game of the year at a neutral site. Prior to that, Templeton was matching us up against top 25 teams (WVU, GT) but we had a golf-cart driver for a coach. It's been a wrong place at the wrong time kind of deal for us, but we are M-State.
We absolutely need 4 winnable games while keeping this bowl streak alive. BUT, it should include the occasional game where we are only a few point favorite, not a 20+ point favorite (Sunbelt/SWAC schools) or a 15 point underdog (OSU).

Some combination of [SWAC (JSU or Alcorn), Sun-Belt (USA or Troy), C-USA (UAB, Tulane, or USM), BCS low or mid-level (TCU, UNC, Houston, Memphis, Illinois, VA Tech, etc.)] to get to 4 games would be the ideal OOC schedule for most years to me. I know it's tough to get things laid out right, but we should be able to do that at least every 2-3 years.

[cubswillwinitonedaydawg]

If your previous point "The problem is, nobody around the country cares about the Liberty Bowl or Music City Bowl or Compass Bowl, and they don't care who you play in those games" is true, then the difference between 6-7 wins isn't that big a deal. So this year, since we got to 6 even with a top-15 lidlifter and numerous injuries, it didn't really matter cause we got to 6 wins. I think now that our program is having some sustained success, we could be able to expect 3-5 SEC wins most years. So we could afford to throw in a toss-up non-conference. We win it, good. Solid win, bigger crowd, still 4 OOC wins and just need 2 SEC wins for a bowl. You lose it, have to hope like this year that we win at least 3 SEC games.

I feel much better about BCS opponents being winnable games now than I did about 5 years ago. We need 3 should-be-easy wins, but I don't see the problem throwing one toss-up or slightly favored type game in there if we can. This year we were a 15 or so point underdog. Stricklin had a decent idea, but got a little too greedy.

[NewTweederEndzoneDance]

But you just said that part of the point is to schedule a winnable game. If the mid-level team happens to be good when we play them, then that makes the game much less winnable. That is what I'm saying. No one seems to want to schedule really good teams, everyone wants either a cupcake or a mediocre BCS conference team. Well, it's much easier to schedule cupcakes than it is mediocre BCS teams and avoid having them be really good by the time you play them.

Sure, it would be back luck, but that doesn't mean it wouldn't still hurt us.

Winnable does not mean auto-win. Remember the whole point is about exposure. If we have a home and home with NC State and we go over there and show out, that helps us tremendously, both with perception of our program from folks over there and potential recruits who may suddenly see MSU as a place they could go. We do absolutely nothing to help ourselves by scheduling Troy, Memphis, South Alabama and Jacksonville State each year, other than potentially increasing out bowl destination (which is the other point - better bowl = better exposure, even if most people nationally don't care about the game)

[The Croom Diaries]

Beating Rice and beating GA Tech would essentially be one in the same this year - us and OM are in the SEC and are expected to beat non-SEC teams of similar status. But if we lose it would hurt worse than losing to GT just based on perception of the programs, regardless of who is actually the better opponent. Getting a win only really matters if it's a big win. Like when OM beat a 11-1 Texas Tech team in '08 and it gave them all the hype for the following season. Or when we whipped Michigan and got hyped up for 2011. I don't think it does much for recruiting so much as the way pundits view the program, if it's trending up or down, and specifically the following year's team.

[Todd4State]

I think most everyone is missing the point simply because the original post mentioned Richard Cross. The point Bogey is trying to make is all about perception. It has nothing to do with the fact that Rice is probably better than Pitt was last year or GT is this year. The point is that beating either of those schools, which have more than 10 fans (seriously, did ya'll see that game last weekend? I think they had half of Rice's stadium tarped off, and it was for a championship), is always considered to be a better win than beating a team like Rice. Conversely, losing to Rice would be much much more damaging than losing to GT or Pitt, despite Rice probably having the better team.

As much as this board bitches about the Ole Miss spin, you'd think that we'd have learned by now that perception = reality a lot of the time. That's the same argument gravedigger is having about the scheduling - PERCEPTION.

No one is missing the point becuase of Richard Cross. Bogey and you are missing the point because the way that you build perception is to continue to win- not by playing Indiana.

I'll tell you what the perception is going to be right now once we play Rice- "Damn- MSU sold that place out! It's all Maroon. They must have good fans. Their team is pretty good too- they've been to four bowls in a row." And then after we skulldrag the nerds from Rice, our fans are going to be wooly and excited for next season. Watch.

The only people that will be down on it are going to be Ole Miss people.

You talk about perception being reailty- let me ask you this- those teams that Coach mentioned below- even notice how NO ONE calls them out on their schedule? Duke and Baylor get TONS of props from ESPN. Why would we be any different? The experts would look even more dumb than usual if they try to call out our schedule when we have to play Bama, LSU, and Auburn every single year. And that's why they don't call us out. That's reality.

[Todd4State]

Winnable does not mean auto-win. Remember the whole point is about exposure. If we have a home and home with NC State and we go over there and show out, that helps us tremendously, both with perception of our program from folks over there and potential recruits who may suddenly see MSU as a place they could go. We do absolutely nothing to help ourselves by scheduling Troy, Memphis, South Alabama and Jacksonville State each year, other than potentially increasing out bowl destination (which is the other point - better bowl = better exposure, even if most people nationally don't care about the game)

If we play NC State, recruits from North Carolina are not going to suddenly flock to MSU. It doesn't work that way. We are in the SEC. We get about as good exposure as we can possibly get just from that fact alone. And again, as far as recuiting- we help oursleves out MUCH more by having a home game against Troy than we would by playing NC State. Look at all the recruits we got from West Virginia and Oregon.

[Todd4State]

Good point about other BCS schools being in the same boat. Probably hard to find a brand name team that is very beatable, at an attractive enough series and payout deal.
I just feel like there is room for out-of-conference scheduling improvement if it can be done.

Last 4 years and next year OOC:
Memphis, Alcorn St, Houston, UAB
Memphis, LA Tech, UAB, TN Martin
Jackson State, Troy, South AL, Middle TN
Oklahoma St, Alcorn St, Troy, Bowling Green
USM, UAB, South AL, TN Martin

Not many games to get our fanbase pumped about. 1 BCS opponent in 5 years, and that opponent was a top 15 opponent in the first game of the year at a neutral site. Prior to that, Templeton was matching us up against top 25 teams (WVU, GT) but we had a golf-cart driver for a coach. It's been a wrong place at the wrong time kind of deal for us, but we are M-State.
We absolutely need 4 winnable games while keeping this bowl streak alive. BUT, it should include the occasional game where we are only a few point favorite, not a 20+ point favorite (Sunbelt/SWAC schools) or a 15 point underdog (OSU).

Some combination of [SWAC (JSU or Alcorn), Sun-Belt (USA or Troy), C-USA (UAB, Tulane, or USM), BCS low or mid-level (TCU, UNC, Houston, Memphis, Illinois, VA Tech, etc.)] to get to 4 games would be the ideal OOC schedule for most years to me. I know it's tough to get things laid out right, but we should be able to do that at least every 2-3 years.

You say our fans weren't "pumped" up about those schedules, and yet they all sold out.

[drunkernhelldawg]

I don't think there's an easy way to beat a team with ten wins. I hope we can do it, but I think it comes down to the final minutes.

[cubswillwinitonedaydawg]

Yeah, the seats were jam packed for several of those.**

I love our sellout streak. But we would have more actual butts in seats for bigger name teams. I have season tickets and I'm there regardless of opponent if I can help it, as are many dawg fans. But that's not the case for everybody.

I'm not saying ditch the cupcakes - we gotta have those to get to 6 wins - I would just like to see it bumped from 4 to 3. Not a huge deal if we don't, but I certainly wouldn't mind it.

[NewTweederEndzoneDance]

No one is missing the point becuase of Richard Cross. Bogey and you are missing the point because the way that you build perception is to continue to win- not by playing Indiana.

I'll tell you what the perception is going to be right now once we play Rice- "Damn- MSU sold that place out! It's all Maroon. They must have good fans. Their team is pretty good too- they've been to four bowls in a row." And then after we skulldrag the nerds from Rice, our fans are going to be wooly and excited for next season. Watch.

The only people that will be down on it are going to be Ole Miss people.

You talk about perception being reailty- let me ask you this- those teams that Coach mentioned below- even notice how NO ONE calls them out on their schedule? Duke and Baylor get TONS of props from ESPN. Why would we be any different? The experts would look even more dumb than usual if they try to call out our schedule when we have to play Bama, LSU, and Auburn every single year. And that's why they don't call us out. That's reality.

You don't even seem to be talking about the same thing I am, which is growing the MSU brand. If you are fine with letting the SEC grow our brand for us, which your post right after this one seems to do by saying that being in the SEC is all we need, then that's your call. Not to mention you completely take what I am saying out of context by implying that I believe that "playing NC State automatically means we get more recruits". It's about exposure and expanding a brand. It's clear you missed that section of Marketing 101.

[Todd4State]

You don't even seem to be talking about the same thing I am, which is growing the MSU brand. If you are fine with letting the SEC grow our brand for us, which your post right after this one seems to do by saying that being in the SEC is all we need, then that's your call. Not to mention you completely take what I am saying out of context by implying that I believe that "playing NC State automatically means we get more recruits". It's about exposure and expanding a brand. It's clear you missed that section of Marketing 101.

The SEC is a huge part of our brand. Your head is in the sand if you deny that. How did playing Oklahoma State this year in the closest thing that we can get to other than a bowl work out for us and our brand? And you're suggesting that playing NC State would somehow magically grow our brand better when it's competing with a lot more SEC games during a week of the regular season?

If we want to grow our brand, we need to get to where we are winning 8 games a year and going to NYD bowls. Not 6 and then a minor bowl.

I didn't miss anything in Marketing 101- but it's clear that you missed History 101. Repeating the doomed past and then expecting better results is foolish. It's all about the bottom line and the end results- that's all recruits look at. They don't have the time or interest to break down SOS and they don't care if we play Indiana or NC State since they know that they are going to get to play Alabama, LSU, A&M, and Auburn every single year at a minimum.

[Todd4State]

Yeah, the seats were jam packed for several of those.**

I love our sellout streak. But we would have more actual butts in seats for bigger name teams. I have season tickets and I'm there regardless of opponent if I can help it, as are many dawg fans. But that's not the case for everybody.

I'm not saying ditch the cupcakes - we gotta have those to get to 6 wins - I would just like to see it bumped from 4 to 3. Not a huge deal if we don't, but I certainly wouldn't mind it.

A sell out is a sell out. If we schedule the cupcakes appropriately, we'll have no problem with the crowds. The opening home game and homecoming are two good examples of times to schedule them. The interest in MSU football this past season was also the lowest it had been since Dan arrived. With our recent turnaround and a likely bowl win- I am expecting the demand for MSU football tickets to be as high as ever.

[NewTweederEndzoneDance]

The SEC is a huge part of our brand. Your head is in the sand if you deny that. How did playing Oklahoma State this year in the closest thing that we can get to other than a bowl work out for us and our brand? And you're suggesting that playing NC State would somehow magically grow our brand better when it's competing with a lot more SEC games during a week of the regular season?

If we want to grow our brand, we need to get to where we are winning 8 games a year and going to NYD bowls. Not 6 and then a minor bowl.

I didn't miss anything in Marketing 101- but it's clear that you missed History 101. Repeating the doomed past and then expecting better results is foolish. It's all about the bottom line and the end results- that's all recruits look at. They don't have the time or interest to break down SOS and they don't care if we play Indiana or NC State since they know that they are going to get to play Alabama, LSU, A&M, and Auburn every single year at a minimum.

What the **** are you talking about? You are literally taking something I say and changing it to something else. Where did I deny that the SEC helps our brand, and is not a big part of it? Nowhere. I advocate that we shouldn't let JUST the SEC push our brand, and should be proactive in growing our own brand on top of what we get from the SEC. And what do other SEC games competing against one of our non-conference games have to do with growing our brand? Nothing. At least not in the context in which I'm having this discussion.

And you are the only one talking about playing NC State helping in getting recruits from MS or wherever our brand is already strong. What I am talking about has NOTHING to do with strengthening our brand in places where it is already strong. Playing one decent name each season is not to get Joe Schmoe from Eupora to think "GEE THEY PLAYED BOSTON COLLEGE THIS YEAR!!! OH GOLLY GEE!! I HAVE TO GO THERE NOW!!!!" No one is asking that guy to break down our strength of schedule. Hell, no one other than you is discussing recruits breaking down anyone's strength of schedule whatsoever. For the record, I am not advocating that we should not also seek to keep our brand strong in places where it already is. The SEC, as you so quickly point out, can surely help us make sure we don't lose the base.

It's about playing decent name games that are winnable. If we play Troy, ESPN may consider showing our score on the bottom line of some other game as it scrolls by. If we play Duke, they will probably show at least a few highlights - there's some increased recognition for you. (And save the bullshit about all of our games are on TV; I recognize that, and if that is your first thought then you are still missing the point by a mile) If we play Troy, John Simmons, future engineering savant from Boston doesn't know nor give a flying **** what Mississippi State is. But if we play BC, perhaps that guy sees something he likes; and who knows, maybe he visits the school to check it out. The same concept applies for recruits NOT FROM MISSISSIPPI. (Just to ensure that you are keeping track here - I'm in no way saying that playing in another state opens the flood gates to all the recruits from there - I'm saying having a footprint elsewhere helps build us up over time)

In my History 101 class I seem to remember learning about our amazing coaches, such as Coach Croom, losing to these shining examples you keep giving us. Last I checked Croom was long gone, and we've been to 4 straight bowl games for the first time in our history. We should have established that baseline by now of 6 wins. I do not disagree that its about getting more wins and playing in better bowl games, and hell I'm not necessarily talking about upping the strength of schedule. I don't want to schedule Florida State and Ohio State every season. I do want to schedule 3 gimme games every season. I also want to schedule someone with name recognition. Apparently you'd rather play 10 win Bowling Green than 5 win Indiana, all for the sake of "we need cupcakes to get more wins". That's not even logic that computes.

If you disagree and think the best thing is to be Cupcake U, then that is fine and you are entitled to your opinion. I think that is simply short-sighted.

[BogeyGolfer]

What the **** are you talking about? You are literally taking something I say and changing it to something else. Where did I deny that the SEC helps our brand, and is not a big part of it? Nowhere. I advocate that we shouldn't let JUST the SEC push our brand, and should be proactive in growing our own brand on top of what we get from the SEC. And what do other SEC games competing against one of our non-conference games have to do with growing our brand? Nothing. At least not in the context in which I'm having this discussion.

And you are the only one talking about playing NC State helping in getting recruits from MS or wherever our brand is already strong. What I am talking about has NOTHING to do with strengthening our brand in places where it is already strong. Playing one decent name each season is not to get Joe Schmoe from Eupora to think "GEE THEY PLAYED BOSTON COLLEGE THIS YEAR!!! OH GOLLY GEE!! I HAVE TO GO THERE NOW!!!!" No one is asking that guy to break down our strength of schedule. Hell, no one other than you is discussing recruits breaking down anyone's strength of schedule whatsoever. For the record, I am not advocating that we should not also seek to keep our brand strong in places where it already is. The SEC, as you so quickly point out, can surely help us make sure we don't lose the base.

It's about playing decent name games that are winnable. If we play Troy, ESPN may consider showing our score on the bottom line of some other game as it scrolls by. If we play Duke, they will probably show at least a few highlights - there's some increased recognition for you. (And save the bullshit about all of our games are on TV; I recognize that, and if that is your first thought then you are still missing the point by a mile) If we play Troy, John Simmons, future engineering savant from Boston doesn't know nor give a flying **** what Mississippi State is. But if we play BC, perhaps that guy sees something he likes; and who knows, maybe he visits the school to check it out. The same concept applies for recruits NOT FROM MISSISSIPPI. (Just to ensure that you are keeping track here - I'm in no way saying that playing in another state opens the flood gates to all the recruits from there - I'm saying having a footprint elsewhere helps build us up over time)

In my History 101 class I seem to remember learning about our amazing coaches, such as Coach Croom, losing to these shining examples you keep giving us. Last I checked Croom was long gone, and we've been to 4 straight bowl games for the first time in our history. We should have established that baseline by now of 6 wins. I do not disagree that its about getting more wins and playing in better bowl games, and hell I'm not necessarily talking about upping the strength of schedule. I don't want to schedule Florida State and Ohio State every season. I do want to schedule 3 gimme games every season. I also want to schedule someone with name recognition. Apparently you'd rather play 10 win Bowling Green than 5 win Indiana, all for the sake of "we need cupcakes to get more wins". That's not even logic that computes.

If you disagree and think the best thing is to be Cupcake U, then that is fine and you are entitled to your opinion. I think that is simply short-sighted.

Well done, sir! Outstanding post!

[Coach34]

I do want to schedule 3 gimme games every season. I also want to schedule someone with name recognition. Apparently you'd rather play 10 win Bowling Green than 5 win Indiana, all for the sake of "we need cupcakes to get more wins". That's not even logic that computes.

If you disagree and think the best thing is to be Cupcake U, then that is fine and you are entitled to your opinion. I think that is simply short-sighted.

The thing is- we play Bowling Green- we dont have to give them a return game. We play Indiana- we will have to take our asses to Bloomington.

I'm all for playing 8 games per season in Davis Wade as much as possible. Thats tough, as we already have to give the South Alabama's of the world a return game. We simply can't go on the road twice in the OOC.

[gravedigger]

And Coach, I think I may be only speaking for myself here, but Bowling Green is one of those non-patsy teams I can deal with.

My concern is not how name brand the team is we play, but just that we aren't convicted of playing the lowest 4 teams we can get our hands on to schedule. That is the recipe for being left out of the final four. This thing is going to be subjective as all hell. The first time a team makes it in playing the easiest nonconference schedule they could and we are going to see the Networks press the 13 member committee to evaluate the non conference CHOICES each school makes. Teams who chose to play 4 notorious patsies are going to get butchered in the media and that will result in a missed opportunity EVEN IF THEY DESERVED TO GET IN.

MSU will have precious few chances, if any, in our lifetime to have a chance at that crystal. If we miss that opportunity in the name of avoiding a 5-7 season is what I cannot live with. If we are good enough to win it all, we will be good enough to beat that Nc State or Indiana.

If we are on the cusp of a 5-7 or 6-6 season and our bowl hopes ride on beating Central Arkansas rather than sitting at home because we played Georgia Tech, then that isn't much of a goal to reach for and little is lost.

[smootness]

The thing is, as we are right now, we aren't going to suddenly find ourselves fighting to get into the top 4. Once our program has reached that point, then we can discuss whether it makes sense to schedule a tougher OOC game.

But it still doesn't really matter much. Lose 2 games, and you're probably out of the playoff. Lose 1, in the SEC, and you're probably in...OOC games won't matter a whole lot.

[Todd4State]

What the **** are you talking about? You are literally taking something I say and changing it to something else. Where did I deny that the SEC helps our brand, and is not a big part of it? Nowhere. I advocate that we shouldn't let JUST the SEC push our brand, and should be proactive in growing our own brand on top of what we get from the SEC. And what do other SEC games competing against one of our non-conference games have to do with growing our brand? Nothing. At least not in the context in which I'm having this discussion.

It's pretty clear by now you don't know what you are talking about or are bipolar. Either that or you are trying to pretend that your point wasn't bad by pretending that you were talking about something else. But OK- you want to talk about how WE can push our brand with JUST the SEC? You do that by consistently winning 8-9 games a year. And how do you do that? By MSU putting themselves in the best position possible. I'm not saying the we should JUST let the SEC push us- but it is extremely relevant since you know- we ARE in the SEC. My point was because of that we don't have to do gimmicky things like play on Thursday or play a killer schedule to get recognition. If you go up to some random high school football player in Massachusetts and ask them if they would like to play in the SEC, more often than not the answer is going to be "yes". And then if you ask them "even if that school was MSU, the answer is still going to be "yes". You pretending that we are talking about something totally different and wanting to try to stray away from that does not change that. I do understand why you want me to leave that alone- because it completely blows your point out of the water.


And you are the only one talking about playing NC State helping in getting recruits from MS or wherever our brand is already strong. What I am talking about has NOTHING to do with strengthening our brand in places where it is already strong. Playing one decent name each season is not to get Joe Schmoe from Eupora to think "GEE THEY PLAYED BOSTON COLLEGE THIS YEAR!!! OH GOLLY GEE!! I HAVE TO GO THERE NOW!!!!" No one is asking that guy to break down our strength of schedule. Hell, no one other than you is discussing recruits breaking down anyone's strength of schedule whatsoever. For the record, I am not advocating that we should not also seek to keep our brand strong in places where it already is. The SEC, as you so quickly point out, can surely help us make sure we don't lose the base.

No- I understand that you are talking about getting recruits from around the country. But apparently you didn't understand me when I said that playing Oregon and West Virginia- and heck even Georgia Tech didn't help us get recruits from ANY of those areas OR anywhere else. And I would wager that a big reason why we don't get some of the five star elite recruits is because they see us as a 6-7 win type team rather than an 8 win type team. Again, this shows how little you understand about scheduling. I mention recruiting because it IS VERY important. And giving away home games hurts us- there's no two ways around it. Sorry- some of us would like to have an upper level SEC program rather than watch us play someone interesting and stay 6-6.


It's about playing decent name games that are winnable. If we play Troy, ESPN may consider showing our score on the bottom line of some other game as it scrolls by. If we play Duke, they will probably show at least a few highlights - there's some increased recognition for you. (And save the bullshit about all of our games are on TV; I recognize that, and if that is your first thought then you are still missing the point by a mile) If we play Troy, John Simmons, future engineering savant from Boston doesn't know nor give a flying **** what Mississippi State is. But if we play BC, perhaps that guy sees something he likes; and who knows, maybe he visits the school to check it out. The same concept applies for recruits NOT FROM MISSISSIPPI. (Just to ensure that you are keeping track here - I'm in no way saying that playing in another state opens the flood gates to all the recruits from there - I'm saying having a footprint elsewhere helps build us up over time)

So, you think it's a good idea to give away a home game, lose money, and hurt football recruiting for a 30 second highlight and that 5% chance that an engineering scholar might come to MSU because he saw said highlight? Speaking of bullshit- it's obvious you bought LT's. Because that was EXACTLY his thought process behind scheduling the other interesting teams.


In my History 101 class I seem to remember learning about our amazing coaches, such as Coach Croom, losing to these shining examples you keep giving us. Last I checked Croom was long gone, and we've been to 4 straight bowl games for the first time in our history. We should have established that baseline by now of 6 wins. I do not disagree that its about getting more wins and playing in better bowl games, and hell I'm not necessarily talking about upping the strength of schedule. I don't want to schedule Florida State and Ohio State every season. I do want to schedule 3 gimme games every season. I also want to schedule someone with name recognition. Apparently you'd rather play 10 win Bowling Green than 5 win Indiana, all for the sake of "we need cupcakes to get more wins". That's not even logic that computes.

If you disagree and think the best thing is to be Cupcake U, then that is fine and you are entitled to your opinion. I think that is simply short-sighted.

So, Croom was a bad coach. Byrne dealt with it and we moved on because he couldn't handle a manageable schedule. That's irrelevant since he isn't our coach anymore and we have one that can potentially take us to the next level. Actually, since we started playing manageable schedule our baseline has increased, and should increase more the longer we do it. I'm not talking about SOS either- what I AM talking about is what is best for MSU. Giving away home games and costing MSU more in the process is NOT in our best interests. I don't know how much more simple I can put that. You can come back with "I don't know what the **** you're talking about" all you want- but the reason I am bringing up issues such as recruiting, the SEC, money and all of that is because it is absolutely relevant when you are talking about scheduling Duke (heck, they made Alabama play them in Durham a few years ago). If you don't believe me- ask Scott or any other AD at any school. And get back to me when we have to play Bowling Green in Ohio.

What's really happening here is all of the "interesting" schedule people are now trying to compromise since it is obvious to anyone with a brain that the manageable schedule people are right. But instead of West Virginia, they are throwing Indiana or Iowa State out there.

My suggestion is to go watch Indiana play on one of MSU's weeks off if you really want to see them that bad.

[Todd4State]

The thing is- we play Bowling Green- we dont have to give them a return game. We play Indiana- we will have to take our asses to Bloomington.

I'm all for playing 8 games per season in Davis Wade as much as possible. Thats tough, as we already have to give the South Alabama's of the world a return game. We simply can't go on the road twice in the OOC.

But the good thing about playing South Alabama, Tulane, Memphis is even though that is a road game, our fans will show up and basically turn that into an at worst neutral site game- and more than likely into a de facto 8th home game. Bloomington, Indiana- probably not so much.

[NewTweederEndzoneDance]

Todd, you clearly still don't understand what I'm saying. That little stick is apparently blocking your view of the forest I'm describing. Thanks for telling me that I was just pretending to talk about something that I wasn't though, as if you have any idea what I'm talking about. Super argument winning tactic there. Good day to you sir.

[cubswillwinitonedaydawg]

A sell out is a sell out. If we schedule the cupcakes appropriately, we'll have no problem with the crowds. The opening home game and homecoming are two good examples of times to schedule them. The interest in MSU football this past season was also the lowest it had been since Dan arrived. With our recent turnaround and a likely bowl win- I am expecting the demand for MSU football tickets to be as high as ever.

I hope you're right and I think you probably will be. Stadium expansion, a lot of young talent and depth, 4 straight bowls. Lots of reasons for ticket sales to skyrocket. I guess the attendance and atmosphere for a couple of the games this year (BG and Kentucky) got me worried, especially since we're adding more seats. I hope the extra seats will mean added butts, not extra room for fat people to stretch out. If not for the turnaround and bowl like you mentioned, I would be a lot more worried. I think the momentum will help in that regard though. Guess we'll see.