It's slow so I figured I'd start this discussion.
I attended MSU as a freshmen in 2005/06. I was the first of my family to get a college degree so college sports were pretty foreign to me. I watched MSU vs. UM every once in a while, but I rarely had any emotion to the game. After my first game in Spartan Stadium, I began to wonder why anyone would ever choose to go to a Lion's game again with the Spartans a quick 1.5 hour drive away. I loved it, I was hooked.
Mind you, this was the end of the Same Ol' Spartans era that many of you had endured for many years. You had consistently had your heart ripped out with very crushing defeats and lost leads and hot starts to seasons, only to end up watching other teams play in Bowl games over the holidays. I respect all Spartans who made it through that era. That being said, it took those long-time dedicated Spartan fans many more years to finally start enjoying the Dantonio era. They were cautious, as they had been burned before.
Now logic tells us that these over-generalizations such as SOS (Same ol' Spartans) and what not should not really exist. In Pro-Sports, many times rosters and front offices will have complete turnover in a 10 year span. College it happens even more frequently as you can't maintain a player for more than 4 contributing years. However, we still allow these broad generalizations to filter into Sports. The Cubs, for example, have gone through a century of bad luck some would say, Cleveland has the curse, and UM is currently in it's own draught that some of their fan base is just now willing to admit might be a reality given that they feel they've hired the savior.
In reality, are these broad stereotypes just bad luck and fans grasping at straws or is there something to them? JLS teams had minimum depth but recruiting great at the skill positions on Offense. Defense was always leaky, and coincidentally, when the depth had to get tapped into (B1G season), the team would crumble after a red hot start. Was this really a Spartan problem or just a consequence of depth, schedule difficulty, and the way MSU shaped it's teams at the time?
The Cubs are an interesting case, they've gone forever since they have been a contender. Right now they have Theo Epstein (the man who broke the Red Sox curse 2x) and they have Madden (one of the best managers in the game). One could look at their front office decisions over the previous 20 years and question the owners, etc. but what makes them have such bad luck?
I'm curious people's thoughts. One major reason is because I believe many on here DO assume that UM will continue to follow it's trend of over-rated lack of development. I question it because the only consistent variable that I find in the UM program is front office/alumni arrogance that could cripple them. If you look at the facts, they have a brand, they have recruiting pull, they have a coach who although a lil cooky, has done it before in college with less to work with. I hope they continue their Hoke/RRod trends of irrelevance, but it's safe to assume that if you looked at this from the outside, they should be able to compete in 3 years on par with MSU. Now the reality is, their fan base would hope they can do that this year, which could send the cycle back into oblivion if Harbough bounces to the NFL again or if they lose the locker room.
What do you guys think of these over-arching generalizations? Are they just fans trying to make sense of a very complex task of getting hundreds of people rowing in the same direction? Or is there some truth that some places have obstacles that hold them back (i.e. for lack of better work, are cursed) ...
Your thoughts? Any dissent/contribution is welcome.
I attended MSU as a freshmen in 2005/06. I was the first of my family to get a college degree so college sports were pretty foreign to me. I watched MSU vs. UM every once in a while, but I rarely had any emotion to the game. After my first game in Spartan Stadium, I began to wonder why anyone would ever choose to go to a Lion's game again with the Spartans a quick 1.5 hour drive away. I loved it, I was hooked.
Mind you, this was the end of the Same Ol' Spartans era that many of you had endured for many years. You had consistently had your heart ripped out with very crushing defeats and lost leads and hot starts to seasons, only to end up watching other teams play in Bowl games over the holidays. I respect all Spartans who made it through that era. That being said, it took those long-time dedicated Spartan fans many more years to finally start enjoying the Dantonio era. They were cautious, as they had been burned before.
Now logic tells us that these over-generalizations such as SOS (Same ol' Spartans) and what not should not really exist. In Pro-Sports, many times rosters and front offices will have complete turnover in a 10 year span. College it happens even more frequently as you can't maintain a player for more than 4 contributing years. However, we still allow these broad generalizations to filter into Sports. The Cubs, for example, have gone through a century of bad luck some would say, Cleveland has the curse, and UM is currently in it's own draught that some of their fan base is just now willing to admit might be a reality given that they feel they've hired the savior.
In reality, are these broad stereotypes just bad luck and fans grasping at straws or is there something to them? JLS teams had minimum depth but recruiting great at the skill positions on Offense. Defense was always leaky, and coincidentally, when the depth had to get tapped into (B1G season), the team would crumble after a red hot start. Was this really a Spartan problem or just a consequence of depth, schedule difficulty, and the way MSU shaped it's teams at the time?
The Cubs are an interesting case, they've gone forever since they have been a contender. Right now they have Theo Epstein (the man who broke the Red Sox curse 2x) and they have Madden (one of the best managers in the game). One could look at their front office decisions over the previous 20 years and question the owners, etc. but what makes them have such bad luck?
I'm curious people's thoughts. One major reason is because I believe many on here DO assume that UM will continue to follow it's trend of over-rated lack of development. I question it because the only consistent variable that I find in the UM program is front office/alumni arrogance that could cripple them. If you look at the facts, they have a brand, they have recruiting pull, they have a coach who although a lil cooky, has done it before in college with less to work with. I hope they continue their Hoke/RRod trends of irrelevance, but it's safe to assume that if you looked at this from the outside, they should be able to compete in 3 years on par with MSU. Now the reality is, their fan base would hope they can do that this year, which could send the cycle back into oblivion if Harbough bounces to the NFL again or if they lose the locker room.
What do you guys think of these over-arching generalizations? Are they just fans trying to make sense of a very complex task of getting hundreds of people rowing in the same direction? Or is there some truth that some places have obstacles that hold them back (i.e. for lack of better work, are cursed) ...
Your thoughts? Any dissent/contribution is welcome.
