I thought this might spark an interesting debate. Instead of pleading with people to be non-biased and have it get nowhere, I'm going to promote being biased. Make your case for your coach being the one to do the unthinkable.

Dantonio

In favor: Dantonio has top notch facilities to work with. He has fans and a university starving for a championship football team proved by one of their largest spring game turnouts ever. He's grabbed the attention of many big name recruits with his savvy personality. Ohio ties for recruiting. Believe it or not he has an extremely rich tradition (60's when MSU was one of the countries best) that he can build on and try to restore.

Against: Has Michigan, Ohio State, and Notre Dame to compete with for recruits. Nightmare schedule that might cripple a rebuilding process early. History of disasterous meltdowns to work against. Less talented roster.


Beilein

In favor: Tradition in the past to build on. Big conference appeal. Great academic program. A couple of highly touted talents on roster. Great basketball cities surrouding the area. Michigan State's recent ability to recruit around the country, therefore more talent available in state. Appealing offensive history that will be attractive to recruits.


Against: Has MSU, Ohio State, and Wisconsin to compete with within the area for recruits. Not alot to work with outside a couple players. Premier programs within the conference that must be played twice a season. History of losing to compete with. Shady past of the university to deal with. Not alot of backing from university and even fans (embarrassing attendance).

May I answer "neither"? I think both will be positives, but not bring their clubs into the elite.

I have to go with Beilein on this one because the Michigan program is about even to the likes of Illinois, Iowa, Purdue, Penn State. With the type of system that Beilein will run I think it is and would be easier to find success in college basketball. He just needs to prove that he can get solid recruits to go with it. Dantonio's Spartans have slipped down to the likes of Illinois, Indiana, and Northwestern(the pit/scum of the Big Ten) as of late. In football there is a wider variety of positions that need to be addressed. A 5 star recruit in basketball makes a hell of a bigger impact than 5 star in football, and for State at the moment there are just too many holes and not enough/if any 5 star recruits.

I'm not sure on this one. You probably have to define what reviving the program would consist of first.
One good season? And define good there.
I mean, if you make it to bowl games for 3 years in a row is that good? There are almost 30 bowl games and only 119 D1 schools, meaning that half of all D1 teams go to a bowl. All you have to do to get in is win 6 games. If you do that for 3 years, have you restored the program?
In hoops, there are something like 336 teams, and 65 teams go to the dance. That's more like 20%, and very few are at-large. So it's much harder to make the NCAA tourney. In fact, add the NIT and that's still statistically more difficult than going to a bowl game. And yet, 3 straight NIT appearances is hardly restoring the program.

So, I would say State would have to win 22 games in a 3 year stretch. That's two 7 win seasons and one 8 win season. Is that fair? I don't care if they lose or win bowl games. 22 total wins would do it for me. They've won 14 over the past 3 years. Their best stretch in the past 5 was 18 wins. So we're talking about improving that by 4 wins. It doesn't seem like much, but it would be improving by 8 wins over the past 3. That does seem a bit tough.

Meanwhile, for Michigan, I think they need to win over 70 games, with two NCAA appearances in 3 years. That's better than 23 wins per season, and by requiring NCAA appearances, the wins aren't padded by NIT runs. Over the past 3 season Michigan had 57 wins, so it's a big increase. If you look at Wisconsin, they only have 74 wins over the past three years, and I think you would say they were solid.

If we can agree on those standards first I think it would help.
By the way, to clarify, I'm not putting a minimum on any one year. Example, I said State needs 22 wins in 3 years. If they win 4 this year, but then win 9 in each of the next two years they've made it.
If Michigan wins 20 this year, then 25 the next two while appearing in the NCAA's both of those, they've made it.

Ok, so let's agree on the standard first. I need to be able to weigh this with something more than opinion.

I also think it's not fair to use final rankings, since (as previously pointed out) there are almost 3 times as many basketball teams.

Good thread Tre.

I agree. This is a good thread and its nice to actually have a real conversation and not just make fun of each other. I'm voting for Coach B only because I feel its easier to turn around a basketball team in general. Look at what Acie Law has done at Texas A&M....if you get a great floor general or an amazing scorer with some solid role players you could easily turn around a bad squad. Hopefully we will have that soon.

I'm with Jethro, the standard of success needs to be defined first.

I think Jethro's standards seem pretty fair.

GREAT THREAD!
I like Jethro's standards, and would call for them to be where the bar is set. They are realistic, and for now he discounts the post season (which we Michigan Football fans REALLY like).

Now, for my part of the bias: State's "rich" tradition is more than forty years past. They had a pretty damn solid 20 year run from about 1947 to 1967, but even in that span they had three losing seasons. Having said that, State's tradition was, like Michigan's, hurt by the Big 10 and their old Bowl Game rules.
Michigan's basketball tradition is pretty good. A couple final fours in the '60's, one in the '70's, and the glory years of the '80's capped off with the championship in '89. For the record, I think you have to totally disregard what the Jive Five "accomplished".
So, even though it's older, State's football tradition trumps UM basketball tradition.

Facitlities are a no brainer. State seems to be going for the home run, Michigan basketball is still learning how to bunt.

I think the only thing I would add to Jethro's standards, in light of all this, is extending it to five years, and include a conference championship (but I won;t complain if you guys totally disregard my input).

I don't know if either team will win a conference championship in 5 years time, masybe not even in 10 years. I think over the next 10 years, the conference championship in football will go to UM, OSU, Wisconsin, maybe Penn State or Iowa, and if Zook can continue to shake up recruiting, possibly Illinois.
In hoops, it will be MSU or OSU for the next several years. Possibly Illinois, Indiana or Wisconsin, maybe Purdue at the tail end.

I agree that 5 years would be a better measure of sustaining a level, but I think AD's will want to know within 3. And actually, I don't think either will reach the standards I set in the next 3 years. Maybe in the next 4 years, but maybe not.

If we go on the standards I mentioned, I agree with the majority here and think it should be more likely for Beilein. A more difficult schedule should help them get there on SOS/RPI, but should make it more difficult in terms of getting the wins requirement.

As for State, it's pretty tough there as well. They would have to benefit early on from an easier schedule, which I don't think they have yet. Give them the tougher games at home, and give them a year without 2 of the big boys, and maybe they get it done. Good news is they don't have to worry about SOS. 6 wins for any team in the Big Ten should do it.

The reason I go with Michigan is because you need 8 players to be successful in hoops. Meanwhile, you probably need twice that in football. You can get by with some mediocre starters, but you need a decent line, some talent at the skill positions, and a defense that doesn't lay down.

The other edge I give Beilein is that he accomplished that mark at his last stop, while Dantonio didn't. Dantonio was on track to, with an 8 win season last year, but left before he got the chance.

One edge I do give Dantonio is perception. Like others have mentioned, he's a passionate coach from a good breeding ground with great facilities. You would think that would bring in some solid recruits eventually. Meanwhile, Beilein is older with an old school philosophy that doesn't lend itself to individual recognition too much and he's using crappy facilities. He has to recruit IN SPITE of all of that.

I haven't really thought about the standards too much and wasn't really interested in defining them. When I said revive, I was thinking get the program to the point where they are competing for a conference championship regularly.

Now that the points have been made, I think Beilein has it easier too. There is enough left over talent and like many have said, all he needs is a few good players.

Dantonio on the other hand needs several good players on both sides of the ball to be successful.

One additional point, Beilein can load up the schedule with winable games and produce decent enough records to prove to recruits he is turning things around. Dantonio on the other hand has a schedule that is half made up of UM, OSU, ND, Wisc, Penn St, and Iowa. Those are almost guaranteed losses some years with the exception of maybe ND since we tend to own them (outside the meltdown).

I'm going to go with Beilein because of this guy--> http://media.scout.com/Media/Image/39/392178.jpg

One additional point, Beilein can load up the schedule with winable games and produce decent enough records to prove to recruits he is turning things around. Dantonio on the other hand has a schedule that is half made up of UM, OSU, ND, Wisc, Penn St, and Iowa. Those are almost guaranteed losses some years with the exception of maybe ND since we tend to own them (outside the meltdown).


Nice post, Tre. Good point.

Well, I thought Turtleneck Tommy had loaded up the schedule with "winnable" games, and it didn't help him that much. His failures in the conference weighed more heavily than pounding Delaware State into the ground.

Nice post, Tre. Good point.

I disagree. Both must play a difficult Big Ten schedule in their respective sports. And while Michigan gets a bigger chunk of freedom (48% of their games last season were non-conference for hoops, compared to 33% for State in football), hoops also has that SOS and RPI that always comes back. Unless a football team is in the BCS standings, none of that ever comes close to being a factor. So in the past State has already done that, with the exception of Notre Dame. That's why State is so often sitting there at 4-1 or 5-0 or some other deceptively impressive record going into a big game, only to finish the reast of the season with few wins, if any. Michigan has done it, but you notice that voters have seen right through it and they haven't come anywhere close to the top 25.

If Beilein was going to use the schedule to his advantage, he would work to land Michigan in more early season tournaments first. That gives Michigan a shot a more games overall. Example, there were multiple teams that ended up playing almost 40 games last season by the time it all ended. Michigan played 35 counting the NIT games. If they get into some tournaments they can add 2-3 more games to the season. That may not seem like a big deal, but that's adding about 8% to their schedule. Over the course of three years, that's 6-9 more chances to win (and reach that 70 win mark). But what Michigan REALLY needs to do, is bump the average opponent's RPI by 10-20 spots. So instead of playing Maryland-Baltimore County, play Albany or Vermont. It might reduce the number of wins, but improving the quality of the opponent improves the RPI and improves the team. Finally, they need to get on TV more. Last season they were on TV againt UCLA and Georgetown in the regular season. Well, that's nice, but those were two Final Four teams that they had no chance against. Being on tv isn't helpful if it's embarrassing. They need teams like Xavier, Villanova, Georgia Tech, Vanderbilt, Louisville, etc. Teams that are likely to make the tournament from major conferences but not be top seeds. Those would be competitive games and would be more likely to be televised than Central Connecticut State or Wofford.

So while the theory is that he could load the schedule up with softies and impress some guys, I completely disagree. I think recruits would see right through that and recognize they they never play anyone, they're never on tv, and they're nowhere to be seen in the RPI. Give recruits more credit. The ones that would be impressed with 13-0 against schools they've never heard of aren't intelligent enough to qualify.

Your right, scrap that. Terrible post, Tre.

Thank you for showing me the error of my ways, Jeth.

Hahaha - I wasn't trying to dog Tre. I think he has a point, but there's a deeper point and I hope Beilein and Martin realize that. To schedule cupcake teams is to continue part of what has plagued Michigan recently.

Actually, I've heard contrasting quotes from those two on it. Martin on WDFN said: "We need to have more exciting basketball and a lot of that involves the opponent. We have some very exciting opponents coming to Ann Arbor this year. I'm not at liberty to announce them just yet, but out fans will be excited with who we have coming in."

Later, Beilein said: "You can't throw everything at these kids right away. We can't schedule a number of outstanding teams because that could destroy the confidence of these young players. You have to bring them along slowly and give them opponents that can build their confidence."

Despite the parenthesis, those are both paraphrasing comments based on what I remember. I could be reading something differently into what they were trying to say. Perhaps there are better opponents coming in, but some are only marginally better and they're later on in the pre-Big Ten season. Who knows? I'm not sure if UCLA or Georgetown are on the schedule again. I know Duke will be on the schedule. Everything else is a mystery so far.

Anyone know exactly when the official schedule is released?

You just need to sprinkle in a few power conference teams like MSU has done the last 10 years. They frequently play OU, Kentucky, Texas, etc. Even if you lose all those games you still learn a lot. Michigan just needs to get a few games against hte UCLA's of the world.

Here is my ideal schedule for Michigan. I'm taking it completely from teams they've played in the past 5 years. I'm including 16 games before the start of the Big Ten schedule.
1 - Central Michigan
2 - Notre Dame
3 - Boston Univ
4 - Delaware State
5 - Miami (OH)
6 - Vanderbilt
7 - South Florida
8 - ACC/Big Ten (Boston College this year)
9 - Eastern Mich
10 - Duke
11 - Colorado
12 - Western Mich
13 - UCLA
14 - Providence
15 - Butler
16 - Arizona

I think that schedule provides enough games from solid conferences. It gives some winnable games from big conferences, such as Vanderbilt, Colorado, Notre Dame and Providence. They play 4 MAC teams, which on the one hand may hurt their SOS a little, but on the other hand any of those teams could be good in any given year and it also gives them more exposure around the state every single year. Teams like UCLA, Arizona and Duke will always be good and eventually they could maybe even beat one of them. Butler is a nice game. Most of the rest are realistically pushover teams, but eliminating the Coppin State, Chicago State, Youngstown State, Davidson, Wofford, Sacramento State, High Point, Fairfield, Wofford, MD-Balt County, Wisconsin-Milwaukee and Binghamton elements is huge, IMO. The schedule above should be considered a top 40 schedule year in and year out, while still allowing Michigan to go 11-5 or 12-4. If they go 12-4 theyre, and can manage 10-6 or even 9-7 in the Big Ten, with a Big Ten tourney win or two, they could finish with 23-24 wins and make it to the tourney. If they do that for 3 years, they're an established program by the standards I set.

That's all much easier said than done though.

Once he establishes the program for a year or two, then he can pull the RPI up and play some good opponents. But IMO, he just has to avoid embarrassing records early and keep the idea that things might change out there. There team will SUCK next year, therefore he has to avoid embarrassing records.

The problem with what Amaker did was that he was there for 4-5 years, had his system established and he was STILL playing shit teams. By that time, he should have been playing better talent.

Go cupcake, then grab some decent talent, develop it, then test it against the best and get TV time. Dantonio doesn't have that luxury, he'll get blasted early and often unless he's just amazing.

One key thing to remember though and this is what I love the most about Dantonio: He learned under the tuteleage of Nick Saban and Jim Tressel. Great company. That's the one thing that sticks with me.

HipDigIt tuned me into something that Gary Danilesen said on WXYT one time, that MSU won't beat the UM's and OSU's with stars, or by getting them.
He said MSU need sbodies (and yes, good ones) that stick around for four years and win with coaching, experience, and (I'm guessing) savvy and discipline.
That sounds like the Wisconsin approach, and it sounds pretty good to me. If I'm Dantonio, I might shy away from the superstuds for awhile, and go for alot of 2,3,4 star guys that you can coach up, and maybe even by getting them on the field right away.
Belien probably has to try the same thing. What good would it do UM to get a superstar in this or next years class only to have them go pro after one year? Would it help bring other names in? Would it make UM a winner right away?

If Beilein's system and the program ever became the hot thing, sure, superstars could change it. Look at Ohio State. For a long time they had no business being mentioned at the top of the conference.
02-03 they were 17-15
03-04 they were 14-16
04-05 they were 20-12
They really turned it around in 05-06, pulled in the amazing recruiting class and now they've got a great class coming in the next several years to sustain their spot in the top 2, even though many people from those classes are superstars and will leave after 1-2 years.
The trick with getting a superstar is that, if he's going to leave early, you have to take advantage of having them as a marketing tool to make sure you replace him with two more superstars.

Tre, as far as learning from Saban and Tressel, that's great from a recruiting and coaching standpoint. Let's just hope, for your sake, that he didn't learn their integrity, because while the NCAA won't take down Ohio State or LSU, they would have no problems taking down Michigan State, IMO.

Tre, as far as learning from Saban and Tressel, that's great from a recruiting and coaching standpoint. Let's just hope, for your sake, that he didn't learn their integrity, because while the NCAA won't take down Ohio State or LSU, they would have no problems taking down Michigan State, IMO.


A Michigan fan talking about integrity? haha Down south ya'll are viewed as the most scandalist U in the country. Say it's just one sport if ya want to believe it, but that Webber shit still leaves stank on your U all the way down here. I'm not trying to get under your skin, I'm being for real on this. You play word association with "Michigan" down here and the first two responses you'll get are Pretenders and Shady and that's the truth homeboy.

Are you as retarded as you sound?
Michigan basketball has clearly been through scandal. Nobody denies that. But did Amaker or Beilein have any ties to scandalous coaches? Has anything happened under their watch? No. They're clean as can be now. Hang on to ancient history if you like.
Meanwhile, Dantonio's mentors continue to be shady. There's nothing against him at this point, and I was saying I hope for your benefit that there never is. Jump all over it defensively if you want, but only one of us here is denying a potential problem. Michigan knows it happened, and they know they're in good position to prevent it from happening again.
State seems oblivious to the possibility, and that's not a good sign. For the third and final time, I hope it doesn't. Unlike State fans, I would rather win against a full strength team fair and square. Bragging about owning you won't be nearly as fun if you're missing scholarships or your games don't count.

A Michigan fan talking about integrity? haha Down south ya'll are viewed as the most scandalist U in the country. Say it's just one sport if ya want to believe it, but that Webber shit still leaves stank on your U all the way down here. I'm not trying to get under your skin, I'm being for real on this. You play word association with "Michigan" down here and the first two responses you'll get are Pretenders and Shady and that's the truth homeboy.
Listen dickhead, you're about as far south as maybe Jackson, Michigan.
You ask about Michigan down "south", and you'll get a reply like this: "Do that boy play for Alabama or Auburn?" THAT'S what the fucking rednecks down there know.
Now you can advertise yourself as living in Miami or Georgia all you want, but you're nothing more than a fucking poser holed up in some crumbling shack in Hamtramck or some shithole. Pretending you live down "south" doesn't validate your bullshit one drop.

Are you as retarded as you sound?
Michigan basketball has clearly been through scandal. Nobody denies that. But did Amaker or Beilein have any ties to scandalous coaches? Has anything happened under their watch? No. They're clean as can be now. Hang on to ancient history if you like.
Meanwhile, Dantonio's mentors continue to be shady. There's nothing against him at this point, and I was saying I hope for your benefit that there never is. Jump all over it defensively if you want, but only one of us here is denying a potential problem. Michigan knows it happened, and they know they're in good position to prevent it from happening again.
State seems oblivious to the possibility, and that's not a good sign. For the third and final time, I hope it doesn't. Unlike State fans, I would rather win against a full strength team fair and square. Bragging about owning you won't be nearly as fun if you're missing scholarships or your games don't count.

Jethro, I'm sorry homie but you've completely lost it. You regularly jump into these over the top "what if" daydreams you've had and I can hardly read about them anymore. I let some of the over the top absurd Jethro what if UM bball recruiting situations go, but this is too much. You just posted an entire paragraph of garbage you made up in your head. Dantonio was an assistant under Tressel years ago therefore he might try to cheat now because in your mind Tressel has? WTF?! Can you leave your daydreams in your head because you are sounding like Mel Gibson in Conspiracy Theory, only worse. Unbelievable.

What part do you disagree with? The fact that Tressel and Saban have violated rules on more than one occasion? Because that's been documented. Or is it the tendency to be similar to your mentor that you don't believe? Which is it? Let me say, former Izzo assistants tend to be successful and do things right, don't they? So you can buy into it when it's positive, but you're not willing to even consider the possibility when it's negative?

I've been meaning to weigh in on this one. Statistics most probably would bear out Johnny B. Beilein reviving the dead before Dantonio. I mean we're talking the "Bermuda Triangle" of college football here with all its' complexities. I never attended MSU but have been a fan for much the same reason that U-M claims a chunk of its' fan base. Simply put in my formative years in the '60's MSU slapped A2 around so badly that I felt doubly sorry for them. First they had to wear those fucking goofy helmets in public and to add insult to injury were flogged while committing that glamour don't. So then off I go to Tempe/Scottsadale to try my hand at school at ASU and believe it or not nobody out there gives the much talked about 2 dead flies about Big 10 football. We of course were ripping up the WAC then and it wasn't all that exciting except for BYU and a bowl game win over Oklahoma and I thought "you know these guys are pretty good." Anyway I'd see U-M/OSU and of course MSU/ND on national TV and I noticed something weird happened. The stiffs that used to play in the Blue & yellow seemed to have switched uni's with the guys in the Greeen & White.

And so it has been for nearly 40 years. In the early '90's moving back East of the Missisippi I revisited my Big 10 roots and followed the Spartans copiously. Up and fucking down and all around. False starts and stops and what a fucking nightmare!! It was too late though. I wasn't going to jump on the U-M bandwagon because all of a sudden they'd become a regional power. I was going to wait it out until the "cycle" turned. Yeah! Right!! So here I am dick in hand fresh off the heels of a 4-8 season and a new savior coming to town. I was a big John L. fan. I liked the "Cowboy" personna. The Maverick. The great "O" that slapped U-M around until Stanton went down on The Great Big High School Field had me all inspired. Uh, like I said I'm still waiting. I am convinced that when it comes to MSU & Football one can equate it to the final scene in "Chinatown" when Nicholson sees Faye Dunaway shot down and he wrestles with how so much had gone so wrong and his buddy puts an arm around him and consoles. "C'mon Jake its' Chinatown." One fall I'll meet up with Brother Goshboots and we'll see a game after many years of "whoofin'" back and forth. MSU will lose in the last seconds in some untoward fashion and as we walk out of Spartan Stadium he'll put an arm around my hunched shoulders and offer, "C'mon HipDigIt, it's Spartyville."

Sorry if I'm negative MSU FAN but I've seen this fucking movie more than most. I was jacked with Saban, semi-jacked after Bobby W. led them to the Bowl win thinking this is a Saban guy. This will be carryover. This will be GOOD. Pffffffft. John L. with his balls out, ramblin' gamblin' "O" got me excited all over again. Uh cue the dirge music please. Keith Nichol bails out, Everson goes to Iowa on signing day, fuck me with a stick.

Now in comes a seemingly good guy, cue "Won't Get Fooled Again" maestro, with solid pedigree and an NC ring from being a DC with Tressell. He's learned from both Saban & Tressell and EVERYONE has nothing but good to say about him.

I just think he has an uphill battle. This is old shit but I think there is a tremendous disconnect that needs fixing between the administration & the Athletic Dept. As an example hot shit DE David Stanton gets recruited from College of the canyons in Ca. 2 years ago. The fucker moves across country in late summer. 2-3 days before the opener he's told that he'll be inelgible due to some problems with some classes that MSU is not willing to accept. HUH???? John L. looks like a moron and he's pissed and then at the 11th hour it all gets "worked out." It is going on right now with a 4-Star DT named Michael Jordan who is from the Grand Rapids area. He always wanted to be a Spartan. He had grade issues and John L. stashed him at Arizona Western where his 6-6, 285 lb. ass had a million sacks and was an All-American. Now because you can't just come out and talk about this shit because it violates some NCAA bullshit let's just say there is a buzz that he doesn't have the "core classes" required to tranfer into MSU and now it looks like he may end up at Texas A&M. Can you fucking say DISCONNECT? This shit doesn't happen down the road. THEY have a PROGRAM in place.

Good luck to Mark D. I'll be rooting like hell but I have NO expectations. Good luck to JB and his hoops. He has the easier climb. What? A 10 year drought vs. 40? "C'mon Hip. It's Spartyville."

I call on the powers that be to give HipDigit a column.

What part do you disagree with? The fact that Tressel and Saban have violated rules on more than one occasion? Because that's been documented. Or is it the tendency to be similar to your mentor that you don't believe? Which is it? Let me say, former Izzo assistants tend to be successful and do things right, don't they? So you can buy into it when it's positive, but you're not willing to even consider the possibility when it's negative?

I disagree with it being a good idea to go into some outrageous conspiracy theory and tag some potential future problem on a completely innocent coach because of your hatred of Saban/Tressel and your own insecurity with your own Universities scandalist past. Throwing out some far fetched idea with absolutely nothing to back it up is ridiculous. Dantonio has his own coaching career and he's never had a single incident.

This part of your paragraph was absolutely off the wall:
Jump all over it defensively if you want, but only one of us here is denying a potential problem. State seems oblivious to the possibility, and that's not a good sign.

A bunch of made up garbage.

Wow. You took it way further than I did. I simply said that it could be a potential problem if he learned that part from him. That's it. I also said I hoped it wasn't. I'm not trying to be a doomsayer or make something out of nothing. It was a small comment that YOU'VE caused to take over an otherwise good thread you started. How about it dies now and we both forget it was ever mentioned?

I call on the powers that be to give HipDigit a column.

It's his if he wants it.

Contact management.

Same goes for everyone else.

bump