They had the number seven rushing defense in the country. That pretty much destroys everything you’ve tried to claim in this thread.
It’s been amusing watching you flail around like an idiot.
Wimbush
- Thread starter NDIRISH53
- Start date
They had the number seven rushing defense in the country. That pretty much destroys everything you’ve tried to claim in this thread.
It’s been amusing watching you flail around like an idiot.
North Carolina State almost certainly had more individual talent. But there is no getting around the actual on field production of Michigan State front seven, specifically finishing number seven against the run, despite facing competition and a primarily run oriented power five conference.
What are unit performs at that level against that type of competition, they’re very good.
They gave up 39 to northwestern chump. I'm sure playing bowling green and western Michigan the first 2 weeks and ending with Rutgers pads the rushing stats a bit. Any good team they play defense didn't show up. 38 points to ND 24 to Penn State 48 to Ohio state. But you're right, clay Matthews and jj watt and the d line. Look a little more into the stats pencil neck
You really think that giving up 24 to Penn State is evidence that they aren’t good?
That’s 2 TDS below Penn States average scoring.
They were one of the best defenses in the entire nation against the run, and a very good (top 25) overall defense.
And as you yourself pointed out, they did it against high-quality teams, including Penn State.
Like I’ve said, they prove they were very good front to seven on the field.
But feel free to keep referencing recruiting rankings, as if that somehow overrides actual on field performance. Hysterical.
I'll give you something that isn't my opinion. 49 percent completion percentage, have fun trying make the playoff with that from your quarterback. Book and Davis should get a fair shot at the job.
Lol Sparty is on the same leve
Look dude. That d probably doesn't have one guy who you can name off the top of your head. I get they have a tough culture, I get they usually are a very solid D. I just don't see that defense as a world beater. You put them in a prior post "ABSOLUTELY" in the same league as Georgia. Not saying they were a terrible d, but when you have NFL talent you should dominate them. Starting 2 walk ons at d end is ugly, I don't care how you want to twist that.
Book and Davis should ABSOLUTELY get a fair shot at the job, as should Wimbush.
You're 100% right that we're not going to make the playoffs if we don't get improved QB play. There is no question about that.
But assuming that Wimbush can't improve is foolish. That's like assuming that Clausen couldn't ever be better than a 56% passer with 7 TD/6 INT....while leading a 3 win team.
Given the fact that Wimbush led his team to 10 wins in his 1st year as a starter, while personally accounting for 30 TDs and 2500+ Yards, there is PLENTY of reason to beleive he can progress into a BIG TIME player at QB
But Book should get the oppertunity to show he's a better QB than Wimbush is now....but he shouldn't receive anything more than that (though nor should Wimbush)
Since when does having a "name player" matter, if the unit itself is one of the best units in the entire nation ON THE FIELD.
Who cares if a player was a walk-on, a name player, or anything else...if they show on the field that they can be one of the very best units in all of CFB.
You keep trying to find a way around Michigan State's on-field performance. You've tried recruiting rankings, you've tried height/weight, and you've tried "name player status".....but none of it matters....because MSU showed how good its Front-7 was with its on-field production
There is no way to talk yourself around ON-FIELD PRODUCTION
Michigan State was the #7 Run Defense in all of CFB, while also being a Top25 Overall Defense. That's all that matters!!
They were a VERY GOOD Front-7, no question about it. No way to debate it.
Thanks for playing buddy!!
Very good defenses don't give up 39 to northwestern. Nor do they give up 48 to ohio state. Who's paying you from Sparty?
What a stupid, stupid argument.
Do good defenses give up 23 points to COLORADO STATE? Do they give up 24 points to Mississippi State?
- Alabama (best defense in CFB) sure did
Do good defenses giver up 31 points to North Carolina State? Do they give up 27 points to SYRACUSE?
- Clemson (#2 defense in CFB) sure did
Do good defenses give up 28 pointes to Georgia Tech?
- Virginia Tech (#4 defense in CFB) sure did
Attempting to judge the quality of a defense, let alone a specific piece of that defense, based only on 1-2 games while simultaneously ignoring the rest of the season is beyond stupid
There is simply no way for you to talk around Michigan State's ON-FIELD SUCCESS.....you've tried, you've tried hard.....and like all morons, you've failed miserably
Wow you're a dope. 23 points is a whole lot different than 48 points or 39 or 38. Name me one good team Sparty d kicked ass against. Okay they played good against penn state. They also gave up 27 to sorry ass Minnesota.
Look at their schedule genius. Michigan absolutely anemic offense. Indiana Rutgers Maryland western Michigan bowling green. That's when your defense plays great. How did they do against teams that won 10 games? 38 points against ND 48 to Buckeyes 39 to NORTHWESTERN. They played well against psu okay great. This vaunted d line featuring clay Matthews and jj watt ranked 55th in sacks and 94th in tackles for loss. Again I tell you look deeper into the stats pencil neck. Jack swarbrick could strap on a helmet and dominate Rutgers and bowling green bro. Get a grip.
And Colorado State is not same as Ohio State, you idiot. They're a 6-Loss G5 team...that still scored relatively well on Alabama. Are you incapable of even the most basic type of analytic thought??
As far as quality performances by Michigan State:
- Holding Washington State (#16 Total Offense) to 17 Points
- Holding Penn State (#17 Total Offense) to 24 Points
- Holding Iowa (#36 Total Offense) to 10 Points
Again, there is no way for you talk around Michigan State's success on the field....they were the #7 run defense in all of CFB, despite playing a tough schedule
It's been a rough thread for you
Bro you said Michigan states front 7 is "ABSOLUTELY" on the same level as Georgia. Yet I'm the idiot. You are the worst. They had 3-4 bad games on defense minny osu nd nw. Yes they had some good games. They were a tough solid defense. Not much pass rush or disruption. I'm sorry when you replace 2 high 4 stars with walk ons and rank 94th in TFL and 55th in sacks you are not on the same level as NC state or UGA. And they did not play a tough schedule dude. Rutgers bowling green etc etc. plus I guarantee you Bama was playing 3rd stringers against Colorado state. It's not that deep, just calm down and hope your squad doesn't get killed in the Nassar aftermath chief. Now get off my thread
Last edited:
Are you ever going to be right about even 1 single thing? You haven't manage that feat even 1x in this thread, so far.
Hell, North Carolina State, a team you've compared Michigan State to in order to point out how un-talented Michigan State was...finished 42nd in TFL (basically the same as Michigan State)
And a schedule with these teams on it isn't a tough schedule.....lol
- Ohio State (finished #5 Overall)
- Penn State (finished #8 Overall)
- Notre Dame (finished #11 Overall)
- Northwestern (finished #17 Overall)
- Washington State (finished as top unranked team, #26)
- Iowa (finished "receiving votes", a Top30 team)
Again, you've tried to talk around the fact the fact that Michigan State's defense performed well ON THE FIELD.....and you've failed
You took a moronic stance.....and like a typical moron, you let every watch you get evicerated trying to defend it
So before I go to bed. Just make this clear for me... you're arguing that sparty's front 7 is just about as good as Georgia's or NC State...
As a whole, the were on that level, yes. That is, in terms of actually playing CFB and thus how they were as an opponent for ND/Wimbush. For this discussion, pro-potential is meaningless.
They were better than both against the run, though they weren’t quite as disruptive as NC State or especially Georgia.
Overall, I’d give the edge to Georgia, but it’s not like they performed on a whole different level from Michigan State. If fact, Georgia’s front also got absolutely absurd at times this year.
Your obsession with recruiting rankings and height/weight....over how he teams actually perform on the field...is he issue here
Nice way to try to make sense of that insane answer. Okay, you got it skip... sparty's front 7 was right there with UGA's this year.... ok
Right, the answer based on actual on-field performance instead of recruiting rankings is insane.
It’s been fun watching you reset records for failure.
You're telling me UGA is giving up 48 to Ohio state and 39 to northwestern? Minnesota would be happy to come out alive trying to block UGA front 7. I'm pretty certain UGA wouldn't give up 38 to ND... only if there was a way to prove that... but then again Sparty does have jj watt and clay Matthews bookending that nasty d line.
So Georgia gives up 40 to an average Auburn offense, but you know they perform much better against a superior Ohio State team?
Again, your attempts to use one or two games to negate the entire season of performance by Michigan State, which was very good and a defense of side of the ball, is beyond stupid.
Your attempts to claim that a team who we had already watched play wasn’t good, based on their recruiting rankings, was even stupider. I’m constantly doubling down on that assertion after you’ve been provided with multiple counter examples, is flat out moronic.
Again, Michigan State proved it on the field but they’re a very good defense, especially in front. In fact, they finished with better rushing numbers on defense then either Georgia or North Carolina State
It certainly fair to say these defenses were all fairly comparable upfront, as far as 2017 college football performance went.
But it’s been fun watching your temper tantrum a failure when confronted with these facts.
overall: recruiting rankings will predict on field performance.
(See playoff participants and National Champions)
To answer the question of whether Wimbush had played well against good teams, yes.
He also played poorly in some games, regardless of the level of competition.
In 17 he was inconsistant and unpredictable.
(See playoff participants and National Champions)
To answer the question of whether Wimbush had played well against good teams, yes.
He also played poorly in some games, regardless of the level of competition.
In 17 he was inconsistant and unpredictable.
Sort of. Recruiting rankings are somewhat correlated with on-field success, but the correlation is far, far, FAR from perfect.
As such, they’re one useful tool in predicting who will have success in the future. However, they’re completely useless in deciding who was good in he past, as the on-field results are actually available for that discussion, and thus some mediocre predictor of on-field results loses all of its value.
It’s like claiming “I’m not sure if teams who played against Oklahoma faved a good QB this year, because Mayfield was a 0* walk-on during recruiting and he’s pretty small for the QB position”
We saw how good he was on the field, so we don’t need his recruiting rankings or anything else
That's predictive (forward looking) instead of evaluative (backward looking)
So a better corollary to the question of "How relevant are Michigan State's recruiting rankings to the quality of Michigan State's DL in 2017?" would be:
- Question: Who do you expect to make the 2016 CFB Playoffs: Ohio State, Florida State, USC, or Michigan State
- Answer: Michigan State...because we already saw that season playout and can just look at the results that occured on the field
As it stands, you do not
Yes I agree with you, but at the same time sparty d got crucified by any offense with talent such as ND Ohio state minny and I guess northwestern is pretty talented. They played about 5 flat out horrible offenses including Michigan Rutgers and bowling green.
That doesn't mean that Michigan State doesn't have a good Front-7
ND also destroyed NC State, who also had a good Front-7.
Auburn DESTROYED Georgia...but that doesn't mean Georgia had a bad Front-7 either. It doesn't even mean that Georgia couldn't stop Auburn with their Front-7, if given another chance...as we saw.
These thought processes are just not logical or effective
So now Penn State and Michigan State, both Top20 total offenses, didn't have any talent on offense?
Your constant failure is just comical
No one that is attempting to use recruiting rankings to evaluate the quality of a team that has already played and whose on-field performance is available to use has a valid point.
Sorry if facts hurt your feelings.
You are the worst. When did I say that you chump? Wow they held ped state to 24 here's a damn cookie!
Typical response from someone who has been shown to be incapable of defending the moronic stance he's taken.
By the way, you said it right here:
"sparty d got crucified by any offense with talent such as ND Ohio state minny and I guess northwestern"
And yes, holding one of the Top10 Scoring Offenses to 3 TDs below their average....that's a very good performance.
Your lack of knowledge and total stupidity gets more obvious with every post
Ah, the old "I can't actually defend my stance, so I'll just call you crazy and run away" argument
Very persuasive.
You're just as pathetic as always Perse!
You are so sneaky.
#1 When Georgia played AT auburn that team was playing better than anyone in the country and was the most dangerous team for a span of about 4 weeks. Nobody in college could have beaten that auburn team that week, including the national champ and the runner up.
#2 You try to state that all defenses have bad games when in fact Sparty had 4 bad games by stating Bama gave up 23 to Colorado state. Now you tell me do you really think the starters played after halftime?
Friedman you have said Sparty front 7 is on par with a squad that was a hop a jump and a leap away from winning it all. That my friend is moronic. Again I present the numbers. 48, 39, 38, 27.... championship level defenses don't have four games like that. 55h in sacks and 94th in tfl. Where is the disruption? You have literally claimed that because jj watt and clay Matthews were walkons that Sparty 2 walk on d ends must then be good. They kinda sucked if you actually watch. I'm just going to mark you down as a Sparty troll. Goodbye
Ah, so every other team can have hot/cold streaks, and still be a really good Front-7.
But that doesn't apply here.....lololol
I get it, you can't actually defend the moronic stance you've taken, and you're just praying I'll stop the public beating I'm handing you for taking such an incredibly moronic stance
