Oklahoma State game

This is not to rehash old discussions about whether we should have played this game or not, but this game has made me think a lot since the Egg Bowl. I am still in favor of us having played that game, but how different would you be viewing this team if we had scheduled a patsy like most every other SEC school and were sitting at 7-5 right now? I know the whole "you are what your record says you are" applies here, but does anyone truly believe this team is at best a .500 team? I don't.

This is what propels me into thinking next year could be an amazing year for us. Without OK St, we are a 7-5 team with the possibility of 8-5 with a bowl win. So between having started 3 different QBs and 1/3 of our season with a 2 QB system, losing our starting RG and SS game 1, Autry on a bad leg the whole year, Whitley on a bum knee the last half the year, lose Ross for the Egg Bowl for a collar bone, lose Skinner for multiple games, Redmond gone 5 games, and us playing more freshmen than I can ever remember us playing, we were an 8 win team IN A REBUILD YEAR.

Like I said, this is not to be in favor or against the OK St. game, but to say that in actuality we are a 7-5 regular season team in a year we were rebuilding and very young and ended up having to deal with "the most injuries he's ever seen in one season" according to Dan Mullen. I mean crap people, that's pretty impressive. Color me wooly about next year. Better personnel, ton of returning players, much more favorable schedule, and other West teams losing considerably more impact players than we will. Could be special people.

I am still glad we played the OKst game. 7-5 does sound better than 6-6 but it is doesn't change reality. the way the season ended....wins at Ark and the Egg....we have a good team and a good season. A win over a SWAC school doesn't make us a better team or a good season better.

I guess some would argue that if we lose the egg we don't go bowling....well a 6-6 season with a egg loss (with this schedule) would be ho-hom to me. We took our shot at OkSt and beat a good OM team to get the 6th win, that is earning a bowl bid. I like that scenario much better.

I like renewing with USM too for next year much better than a SWAC game. Not our fault they are terrible.

In truth, the injuries coming out of the OK ST game were worse than the loss itself. Now we might have had those same injuries playing a lesser team but I doubt it. Losing Jay Hughes and Justin Malone for the year definitely set this team back and that doesn't even count Russell's concussion. Perkins, Love and Wells also came out of that game with injuries if I'm remembering correctly that cost some playing time over the next game or two.

For me, the manageable scheduling has always been about elevating us up one rung which in reality probably gives us a more "true" look at what our team is.

We should be 6-6 in rebuilding years only WITH A MANAGEABLE schedule. I yelled that out because I want this understood. A manageable schedule is not about scraping in at 6-6 every year- and I'm not saying that's what happened this year.

But our teams in the past turn from 7 win teams into maybe 8 or 9 win teams. Our 9-10 win teams become championship contenders. And with the bowl system, as we saw last year, they only look at wins. More wins = better bowl, which in turn equals better exposure and more bowl money in general. It also helps us to elevate our national profile. As things stand, we can currently say that we have been to two NYD bowls and four bowls total in the past four years. And as we add to that, it looks better and better for us. People like our little brothers at Ole Miss look even more silly when they talk about how horrible our program is with that resume'.

Couple of miracles today (Michigan over Ohio state and Florida of FSU) and OkSU is in the title game.

Most every sec team played at least one solid non-conference opponent, so no, most sec teams did not schedule a patsy in all 4 non-conference slots.

And 7-5 with a W over a crappy directional school wouldn't change my feeling about the season, but I'm also pretty sure that I'm the only msu fan that doesn't just take Ws on their face without taking them into context. I actually am more concered with who we beat, how we looked to the eyes, and how we competed than racking up shitty Ws.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Maroonthirteen

I am still glad we played the OKst game. 7-5 does sound better than 6-6 but it is doesn't change reality. the way the season ended....wins at Ark and the Egg....we have a good team and a good season. A win over a SWAC school doesn't make us a better team or a good season better.

I guess some would argue that if we lose the egg we don't go bowling....well a 6-6 season with a egg loss (with this schedule) would be ho-hom to me. We took our shot at OkSt and beat a good OM team to get the 6th win, that is earning a bowl bid. I like that scenario much better.

I like renewing with USM too for next year much better than a SWAC game. Not our fault they are terrible.

---

I like playing USM because for us to claim that this is our state, we must also conquer them as we have Ole Miss, Jackson State, and Alcorn. If we didn't play them, we would look scared. Giving them a welfare check in two years is no different than us giving one to JSU and Alcorn, which is what we currently do.

I do not want to play them every year though. I don't think it's in our best interests, and I don't think it's in USM's best interests either. I'm OK with playing them twice every five years and maybe rotate them with Memphis or whomever.

I think when we play USM, it's a good game for Mississippi and fans of both schools though. But again, playing them every year I think the game would lose its luster very similar to the Memphis series when we had like a 20 year contract with them it seemed.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dawgs

Most every sec team played at least one solid non-conference opponent, so no, most sec teams did not schedule a patsy in all 4 non-conference slots.

And 7-5 with a W over a crappy directional school wouldn't change my feeling about the season, but I'm also pretty sure that I'm the only msu fan that doesn't just take Ws on their face without taking them into context. I actually am more concered with who we beat, how we looked to the eyes, and how we competed than racking up shitty Ws.

---

You're assuming that the people that can't tell the difference between us, Ole Miss and Michigan State will be watching.

Also, for several schools in the SEC, their tough OOC game is a rivalry game- Florida/FSU, Georgia/GT, and Clemson/USC, etc.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Todd4State

I like playing USM because for us to claim that this is our state, we must also conquer them as we have Ole Miss, Jackson State, and Alcorn. If we didn't play them, we would look scared. Giving them a welfare check in two years is no different than us giving one to JSU and Alcorn, which is what we currently do.

I do not want to play them every year though. I don't think it's in our best interests, and I don't think it's in USM's best interests either. I'm OK with playing them twice every five years and maybe rotate them with Memphis or whomever.

I think when we play USM, it's a good game for Mississippi and fans of both schools though. But again, playing them every year I think the game would lose its luster very similar to the Memphis series when we had like a 20 year contract with them it seemed.

---

Of course the major difference is that JSU and Alcorn don't demand us do a home and home.

Who cares if it's a rivalry, it's a tough non-conf game. And USC played ucf, Florida played Miami, and uga played Clemson, so they only schedule 2 cupcakes.

Point is that most of the sec doesn't schedule 4 pasties, so stop saying they do.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dawgs

Who cares if it's a rivalry, it's a tough non-conf game. And USC played ucf, Florida played Miami, and uga played Clemson, so they only schedule 2 cupcakes.

---

Because there would be a public outcry and the state governments in some cases would force those teams to play the rivalry games regardless. It's very different than us playing Oklahoma State once.

If Ole Miss was in the ACC or Big 12, I would want us to play that game as an OOC game, and I think most fans of both schools would too.

UCF is a mid major. They are good right now- but not really much different than us playing Memphis or UAB. People schedule them so their alumni have an excuse to go to Disneyworld and watch their favorite college football team get a win. If we played UCF, I would expect us to win 9/10 times. And I'm talking about this season.

Florida/Miami is the Florida version of MSU/USM.

I'll give you Georgia/Clemson, although I believe that they have some history and rivalry too. I will also note that Georgia playing them helped derail their season this year.

I'm confused, are those good non-conference match ups or not? Just accept it, most of the conference plays at least 1 BCS non-conf game or at least 1 good non-BCS non-conf game.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dawgs

Who cares if it's a rivalry, it's a tough non-conf game. And USC played ucf, Florida played Miami, and uga played Clemson, so they only schedule 2 cupcakes.

Point is that most of the sec doesn't schedule 4 pasties, so stop saying they do.

---

UF playing Miami and FSU cost them their bowl streak. Yes they lost to Ga Southern but with 2 more cupcakes I doubt they would lose both. UGA is also playing for either Music City or Gator, another win and they would be looking at Outback or Peach.

We shouldn't play these games. UGA and UF are the big boys. Look at their budget then look at ours. We have to go to play games at Troy and UAB, the big boys play all those type games at home. There is also a difference in our schedule because we aren't as good as them year in year out. That makes their schedule compared to their team automatically easier than our schedule.

We need our bowl streak.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dawgs

I'm confused, are those good non-conference match ups or not? Just accept it, most of the conference plays at least 1 BCS non-conf game or at least 1 good non-BCS non-conf game.

---

You are confused. Rivalry is a HUGE part of college football. If you think that we have a rivalry with Oklahoma State, Georgia Tech, West Virginia, or Oregon I can't help you.

You didn't say excluding rivalries, you said that most of the conference schedules 4 patsies. You're wrong.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tbonewannabe

UF playing Miami and FSU cost them their bowl streak. Yes they lost to Ga Southern but with 2 more cupcakes I doubt they would lose both. UGA is also playing for either Music City or Gator, another win and they would be looking at Outback or Peach.

We shouldn't play these games. UGA and UF are the big boys. Look at their budget then look at ours. We have to go to play games at Troy and UAB, the big boys play all those type games at home. There is also a difference in our schedule because we aren't as good as them year in year out. That makes their schedule compared to their team automatically easier than our schedule.

We need our bowl streak.

---

Florida and uga aren't going to better bowls/any bowls because of injuries and sucking. Not the schedule.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dawgs

You didn't say excluding rivalries, you said that most of the conference schedules 4 patsies. You're wrong.

---

OK, excluding rivalries, most of the conference schedules patsies. And the teams that don't have an OOC major rival do schedule four patsies a year.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dawgs

Florida and uga aren't going to better bowls/any bowls because of injuries and sucking. Not the schedule.

---

Well, Florida did lose to Georgia Southern.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dawgs

Florida and uga aren't going to better bowls/any bowls because of injuries and sucking. Not the schedule.

---

So you don't think if UF played Memphis and Tulane instead of FSU and Miami they couldn't get to 6 wins? There is a LARGE difference between MSU and UF and UGA. We should do whatever we can to give us the best chance at beating Bama and LSU. Giving us games that we don't get beat the 17 up is part of giving us a better chance. I am not saying play all SWAC schools but don't play a team that is a perennial top 25 team.

Give up this fight dude, you're in the minority...trust me. Ha

8 should definitely be attainable next year. If Arkansas still sux, that means beating 2 potentially decent teams, if you count Vandy as decent. If Vandy is down, then it means beating one decent team and 7 we should win.

Personally, I think it would be great if we could compete with teams like OK State, but obivously we can't...so no need to try that anymore. No sarcastericks, jsut giving up that thought. Let's just get our 7 or 8.


The "what should happen gets us 7", so we gotta win one of the BOLD to get 8:

USM - win
UAB - win
@ S Alabama - win
@ Kentucky - win
Arkansas - win
UT Martin - win
Vandy - win


@ LSU - loss
Tex A&M - loss
Auburn - loss
@ Bama - loss
@ Ole Miss - loss