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

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tbonewannabe

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.

---

To go along with what I am saying too- if Georgia didn't play Clemson, how would their season have played out? They would have no less than 8 wins at this point. The fact that they lost that game early ended that early, and who knows how it affected them the rest of the year.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Todd4State

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 agree with all that Todd. I like rotating USM/Mem/Tu/Houston/UAB for the fans in those areas and giving us a slightly challenging game. That would give you a couple games with each team every 10 years.

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 are not the only one. I agree with all you wrote.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Todd4State

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.

---

Please list the SEC teams who play 4 patsies like we do. Even Vandy plays WF. Ky plays Louisville. I can't think of one SEC team that plays 4 OOC games like we have lined up for next year. Not one of those teams will win 2 BCS conference games or any significant non-AQ team. Most won't win any.

We are only playing USM because we can see how bad they suck.

If we are so sure we could beat UCF 9 out of 10 times, then put them on the schedule. Would be a huge win compared to a SWAC game.

Did some one really say that if we are going to dominate the state we HAVE to beat Jackson St and Alcorn St?????

Ridiculous thread.

How can we stand around the water cooler and say we could beat this BCS team or that ranked team if we won't even play Tulane quality teams. If we don't respect ourselves and have enough confidence to play the 80th ranked team, then how do we expect other people and recruits and pollsters to respect us?

We need to man up and schedule Wake Forest or North Carolina St or Pittsburg or Virginia or some out west team or ANYBODY in the top 100, just to stop embarrassing ourselves.

I don't mind the occasional Kickoff Classic game when we prove we can EASILY get to bowls without relying on the schedule. I DON'T want any big time home and homes or scheduling a "mediocre" team.

There is NO positive to playing a Texas Tech, Virginia, Pitt, UCF, etc.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HunterDawg

Please list the SEC teams who play 4 patsies like we do. Even Vandy plays WF. Ky plays Louisville. I can't think of one SEC team that plays 4 OOC games like we have lined up for next year. Not one of those teams will win 2 BCS conference games or any significant non-AQ team. Most won't win any.

We are only playing USM because we can see how bad they suck.

If we are so sure we could beat UCF 9 out of 10 times, then put them on the schedule. Would be a huge win compared to a SWAC game.

Did some one really say that if we are going to dominate the state we HAVE to beat Jackson St and Alcorn St?????

Ridiculous thread.

How can we stand around the water cooler and say we could beat this BCS team or that ranked team if we won't even play Tulane quality teams. If we don't respect ourselves and have enough confidence to play the 80th ranked team, then how do we expect other people and recruits and pollsters to respect us?

We need to man up and schedule Wake Forest or North Carolina St or Pittsburg or Virginia or some out west team or ANYBODY in the top 100, just to stop embarrassing ourselves.

---

Vanderbilt- Wake Forest is not a good program. They also played Austin Peay, UMass and UAB
Florida- Toledo, Miami (Florida equivalent of us playing USM as I said above), Georgia Southern, and Florida State (Major in state rival)
Kentucky- Western Kentucky, Miami-Ohio, Alabama State, and Louisville (Major in state rival)
Mizzou- Murray State, Toledo, Indiana, and Arkansas State
Texas A&M- Rice, Sam Houston State, SMU, and UTEP.

We scheduled USM when Byrne was the AD. They have won a C-USA title since we scheduled them. If you told me in 2010 that they would challenge Northwestern's record for consecutive losses, I wouldn't have believed you. It is what it is, and quite frankly it's about time after what seems like years of catching people at the wrong time.

You obviously don't understand the purposes of playing Jackson State and Alcorn. It's not so much about beating them. It's about extending an olive branch to them. What we are doing to them is like the Roman empire helping out a weak nation that they have conqured. We pay for a good bit of their athletic budget when we play them, and I assure you it's much appreciated. It's about what we can do for them and what Ole Miss won't do for them and what USM can't do for them.

What your Ole Miss little brothers say around the water cooler doesn't matter. They want us to play a difficult schedule and kill ourselves off to give them a better chance to beat us. Pollsters? Last season with our "weak" schedule, we were ranked and were very close to cracking the top ten and made a NYD bowl. In the past we didn't get "respect" because Jackie is hated throughout the country. It had nothing to do with our schedule. Last year is proof.

A top 100 team? Let's shoot for the moon and play a top 70 team- in a bowl every year. Playing NC State in the Peach Bowl > playing NC State in a regular season game that no one pays attention to.

And for the fine print "well, not EVERY one plays four patsies Todd" crowd- just because several in the SEC are not doing it, it does not mean it is best for MSU. I'm pretty sure Tennessee is happy with their decision to play Oregon right now.

Also- I would be totally fine with playing UCF. They are what I would classify as an alumni road trip game for us. They're not my first pick because I'm not into Disneyworld and driving to Orlando is a pain in the ass. I woudn't criticize Scott over it if we did play them though.

One other thing about the schedule- it's not just about going to bowls and increasing our national profile. Playing NC State is going to cause us to have a home and home deal- which costs us a home game, which in turn costs MSU money. Another reason we play JSU and Alcorn is because we actually save money playing them over some other I-AA schools. It's a win/win for us and them. The more home games we have, the better. Seven being a reasonable number in case anyone is wondering. And if one of those is an alumni road game, we essentially turn that game into a neutral site with the crowds we bring- see Tulane and Memphis.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Todd4State

Also- I would be totally fine with playing UCF. They are what I would classify as an alumni road trip game for us. They're not my first pick because I'm not into Disneyworld and driving to Orlando is a pain in the ass. I woudn't criticize Scott over it if we did play them though.

---

Let's do it, then. They are currently ranked in the top 20. There is an easy win that will get us that elusive top 20 win we need. Our current practice of playing top 10, top 10, top 15, top 15, top 20, top 20 (all losses) and then get our swagger back by beating 2 0-8 conference teams and 4 complete joke teams just isn't fooling anybody. Yes, we can say we had a tough SOS, but if you lose all the tough games, people notice. Put some games in there we can be proud of winning.

I am fine with getting teams with big names who currently suck. Get teams who are also beating up on joke teams (like UCF) and beat them. Indiana, NC State, whoever, just pick crappy ACC and Big Ten teams. Looks much better on the ticker down at the bottom of the screen. Get New Mexico or UNLV, or Fresno State. Nowhere near SEC caliber but would be seen as real wins.

Our "noble" gesture of helping out the poor little SWAC teams just isn't viewed as a positive thing.

See how much better we feel by beating the Bears? Why? Because, even though they aren't close to ranked, we are proud of the win.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by maroonmania

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

---

We're going to buy out of that home and home. I'll be shocked if we actually play them in Hattiesburg in 2015.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HunterDawg

Let's do it, then. They are currently ranked in the top 20. There is an easy win that will get us that elusive top 20 win we need. Our current practice of playing top 10, top 10, top 15, top 15, top 20, top 20 (all losses) and then get our swagger back by beating 2 0-8 conference teams and 4 complete joke teams just isn't fooling anybody. Yes, we can say we had a tough SOS, but if you lose all the tough games, people notice. Put some games in there we can be proud of winning.

I am fine with getting teams with big names who currently suck. Get teams who are also beating up on joke teams (like UCF) and beat them. Indiana, NC State, whoever, just pick crappy ACC and Big Ten teams. Looks much better on the ticker down at the bottom of the screen. Get New Mexico or UNLV, or Fresno State. Nowhere near SEC caliber but would be seen as real wins.

Our "noble" gesture of helping out the poor little SWAC teams just isn't viewed as a positive thing.

See how much better we feel by beating the Bears? Why? Because, even though they aren't close to ranked, we are proud of the win.

---

Well, talk to Scott about playing UCF. If you think UCF is a perinnial top 20 team- I think you will be disappointed though.

Who is noticing that we are losing all tough games? No one outside of Bo Bounds and your water cooler buddies. 6-6 with a loss over Oklahoma State does not give us the exposure that we got last year winning 8 and going to a NYD bowl. The only reason last year "sucked" was because we were upset by Ole Miss on the road.

Let's look at UCF's difficult schedule- Akron, FIU, Penn State, South Carolina, Memphis, Louisville, Connecticut, Houston, Temple, Rutgers, South Florida, and SMU. They litereally play three challenging games. They went 2-1 against those difficult teams. Do you see anyone criticizing their schedule? No.

You say that you are fine getting big name teams that currently suck- the thing that you and some other people aren't getting is you don't just call up Texas or whomever if you are Scott and say "hey we're playing next year". Those games have to be scheduled YEARS in advance. We had to schedule USM about five years out. You can't do that in Division I to a BCS conference team like that just because their schedule fills up years in advance. We had to do a ton of re-arranging just to get the Oklahoma State game in this year. Texas five years from now may have Saban and be the National Champion. Like I said- when we scheduled USM, we had no clue that they were going to be coming into our game coming in at 1-23.

Helping out SWAC teams isn't going to have a national impact, but neither is playing any I-AA team. But I guarantee you that in state it is viewed extremely positively. And I also believe that if people are going to watch a I-AA team it's much more likely to be an in-state SWAC school than Maine. And a lot of our fans like to watch their bands. Again, what's the negative about it? More State people showed up to Alcorn than they did to watch Oklahoma State in Houston.

When did Ole Miss leave the SEC? We feel better about beating them because it's Ole Miss. You say we are proud of the win even though they aren't ranked- neither is La Tech when we play them. Comparing a rivalry game to an OOC game is totally apples and oranges.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TXDawg

We're going to buy out of that home and home. I'll be shocked if we actually play them in Hattiesburg in 2015.

---

After all these years of Anyone, anywhere, any time and begging us to come to USM, I would be more shocked if it didn't happen.