Game 6 "Expert" Picks: Nebraska @ Michigan State

[Landlord]

 

 

Nobody knows who the better team is until they actually play the game. That's why the games are played.

 

Now, you can say they are "perceived" to be the better team. But, to flat out say, "They ARE the better team"....well....nobody knows.

 

 

 

 

Perception defines reality in college football, so they're really saying the same thing.

 

Ummm...no.

 

 

 

Ummm...yes?

 

How are 4 teams going to make the playoff if not for the preception of the voting committee? How did Nebraska and Michigan split the '97 championship if not for the coaches and the AP perceiving different teams being better? Why didn't non power-five schools have automatic BCS bowl tie-ins if not for the perception that their conferences are weaker?

 

A huge and timeless component of college athletics is polls and top 10 finishes and rankings which are almost entirely based on perception.

[Redux]

Well, theres a reason we dont use the polls anymore to crown a champion. Perception is based off of results. We can sit here and say Sparty is perceived to be better all we want, that doesnt make it so. Luckily we get to find out on the field Saturday. Unlike the polls that solely used perception.

[Landlord]

Well, theres a reason we dont use the polls anymore to crown a champion. Perception is based off of results. We can sit here and say Sparty is perceived to be better all we want, that doesnt make it so. Luckily we get to find out on the field Saturday. Unlike the polls that solely used perception.

 

 

At the end of the day, Sparty gets to say they were the 2013 B1G champions and Rose Bowl champions, which are uncontested truths.

 

But they also get to say that they were the 3rd best team in the nation when it was all said and done, and history will reflect that as being true.

[Redux]

 

Well, theres a reason we dont use the polls anymore to crown a champion. Perception is based off of results. We can sit here and say Sparty is perceived to be better all we want, that doesnt make it so. Luckily we get to find out on the field Saturday. Unlike the polls that solely used perception.

 

 

At the end of the day, Sparty gets to say they were the 2013 B1G champions and Rose Bowl champions, which are uncontested truths.

 

But they also get to say that they were the 3rd best team in the nation when it was all said and done, and history will reflect that as being true.

Yes thats true....last year.

[RedDenver]

Connor cook is going to get his numbers, but if we force a few picks and put our offense in to some short field situations then I see us running away with the game. This year just has s different feel to it, this team has a different feel. A good one.

Dang it! I've been trying to keep my expectations in check, but I agree with you. This feels a lot like the 2011 MSU game. MSU had all the hype going in - NU dominated.

[True2tRA]

 

 

 

Nobody knows who the better team is until they actually play the game. That's why the games are played.

 

Now, you can say they are "perceived" to be the better team. But, to flat out say, "They ARE the better team"....well....nobody knows.

 

 

 

Perception defines reality in college football, so they're really saying the same thing.

Ummm...no.

 

Ummm...yes?

 

How are 4 teams going to make the playoff if not for the preception of the voting committee? How did Nebraska and Michigan split the '97 championship if not for the coaches and the AP perceiving different teams being better? Why didn't non power-five schools have automatic BCS bowl tie-ins if not for the perception that their conferences are weaker?

 

A huge and timeless component of college athletics is polls and top 10 finishes and rankings which are almost entirely based on perception.

Huge problem with your theory.

 

The difference is THESE TWO TEAMS ARE GOING TO PLAY EACH OTHER!

 

Hello McFly?

[irafreak]

 

 

 

 

Man, almost all those predictions are the same!

 

I guess I don't see why people feel like MSU has a sweet offense? They beat up 3 crappy teams and got smoked by Oregon.

 

I really think that these are two evenly matched teams.

I'm not sure about their offense. But, they didn't get "smoked" by Oregon. They were ahead in that game in the third quarter. I think MSU totally got worn out at the end of that game.

 

I'm hoping we can pound them all game and have the same affect at the end of the game this weekend.

MSU had one good quarter where they scored 24 of their 27 points. They were outscored in three out of four quarters and after the half were outscored 28-3. The game was competitive for a half but Sparty was soundly outplayed overall in the game.

Watch the game. The second quarter was when MSU found it's groove and absolutely outplayed Oregon. If this had happened in the 3rd quarter...they probably win that game. Oregon just proved to have the better coaching staff and adjusted. Had that game been in East Lansing I believe MSU keeps the momentum and holds on to win. Don't be fooled by the box score. MSU is right up there with Oregon...a place we haven't shown to be at yet. We've compiled a nice little record but this will be our first true test. I'm anxious to see how we do.

So, the ducks smoked them for 3 quarters and have a better coaching staff, but MSU is just as good?

If the game had been in east Lansing would the ducks coaching staff have been stupid?

 

There was a reason the line was so high.

 

3 quarters? You know MSU went in leading at the half right? My gosh by your logic Michigan state killed us last year because the final score said so.

 

The reason east Lansing makes a difference is because a hostile crowd can motivate the home team and keep them going during the down times and a momentum swing at home is much bigger than one on the road. This isn't hard.

 

and vegas sets lines so an equal number will bet on each side...it's perception. MSU played better than I thought they would in week 2 on the road against a heisman contending quarterback. Yet a lot of people here want to give them no credit because the final score said they lost by 19. I mean are we really only 1 score better than McNeese state?

 

MSU has taken care of all their creampuffs better than we did. They failed their big test but not miserably. Let's see if we fail ours. If Nebraska loses on the road by 19 are you going to immediately declare how much we suck or does it matter how we play? Flip it around. We're leading at half after rattling off 24 points and completely shutting down MSU. We collapse late in the 3rd and can't get back on track while the team looks shell shocked. Do we suck? Should nobody be concerned about us for the rest of the schedule?

[Saunders]

 

MSU has taken care of all their creampuffs better than we did.

 

If you discount the fact that they played much worse teams, sure.

[deedsker]

 

MSU has taken care of all their creampuffs better than we did.

 

If you discount the fact that they played much worse teams, sure.

We make fun of how terrible Florida Atlantic was and they took Wyoming to the end and lost at the end of the game field goal to Wyoming.

 

We also have a conference win under the belt and Miami is looking better since our win.

[Saunders]

 

 

MSU has taken care of all their creampuffs better than we did.

If you discount the fact that they played much worse teams, sure.

We make fun of how terrible Florida Atlantic was and they took Wyoming to the end and lost at the end of the game field goal to Wyoming.

 

We also have a conference win under the belt and Miami is looking better since our win.

 

MSU's best win is a 73-14 win over Eastern Michigan, which looks impressive, until you see that they lost 65-0 to Florida.

[Landlord]

Huge problem with your theory.

 

The difference is THESE TWO TEAMS ARE GOING TO PLAY EACH OTHER!

 

Hello McFly?

 

 

 

 

 

 

If we beat them then we are better than them on Saturday.

 

 

 

 

I'm confused as to what your point is to be honest.

[True2tRA]

 

 

 

Nobody knows who the better team is until they actually play the game. That's why the games are played.

 

Now, you can say they are "perceived" to be the better team. But, to flat out say, "They ARE the better team"....well....nobody knows.

 

 

Perception defines reality in college football, so they're really saying the same thing.

 

 

 

How did Nebraska and Michigan split the '97 championship if not for the coaches and the AP perceiving different teams being better? Why didn't non power-five schools have automatic BCS bowl tie-ins if not for the perception that their conferences are weaker?

 

Huge problem with your theory.

 

The difference is THESE TWO TEAMS ARE GOING TO PLAY EACH OTHER!

 

Hello McFly?

 

The Power 5 schools don't all play each other.

 

Nebraska and Michigan didn't play against each other to settle who the better team was.

 

Nebraska and Michigan St. play each other on Saturday to determine the better team.

 

Simple concept.

 

You said MSU IS the better team. I said that has yet to be determined.

 

The fact that we've gone back and forth about this for this long, including your buddy NuPolo, is almost disturbing.

[Landlord]

The Power 5 schools don't all play each other.

 

Nebraska and Michigan didn't play against each other to settle who the better team was.

 

Nebraska and Michigan St. play each other on Saturday to determine the better team.

 

Simple concept.

 

You said MSU IS the better team. I said that has yet to be determined.

 

The fact that we've gone back and forth about this for this long, including your buddy NuPolo, is almost disturbing.

 

 

 

NUpolo is really the last person on this website to be considered my buddy, even probably after you, so the fact that he actually "sided" with me on this one in disagreeing with you speaks volumes.

 

Yeah I said MSU is the better team. Because I think they are. Why exactly do you have a problem with that? You say stupid sh#t all the time that you're certain is true but likely isn't.

 

 

 

Personally, I don't feel like Nebraska and Michigan have to play each other for me to know and declare that they are a far worse team than we are, but as long as you have never once declared us better than a team we didn't play that season then okay good for you.

[True2tRA]

No, but had we played, I think it would have been clarified who was the better team.

 

You and Polo agreeing does speak volumes. He's is wrong often, just as you are.

 

My issue was you declaring MSU the better team when the two are a few days away from playing. We don't have to perceive what might be, it's about to go down on the field of play.

 

My original question was if we beat them would you still claim they are better? Truly though, I don't care what you think. If we beat them, it won't matter. If we lose, you'll be right and I'll be disappointed that we lost.

[RedRex]

Both are good teams. Both have talent. Both have records based on questionable competition. I see one difference.

 

NU got pushed by MacCheese St., the offense responded to win. Miami pushed NU, and the defense responded. MSU has only been pushed once, by Oregon, and they DID NOT RESPOND. When they needed to cowboy up or make a change from what they normally did, they flat-lined.

 

Let them soak up the media love, it's worthless down on the field.

 

Is it too late to run smack for the shut out in 1914? That sh!# was crazy yo!