However, if they were 11-2 (with a loss in the Big 10 title game) I still wouldn't have put it past the BCS to take Michigan over them, despite MSU being the better team. Why? Money. These games, other then the national championship, are about money. UM's one of the 5 biggest 'name' schools in the nation (along with USC, Texas, Notre Dame, and probably Alabama). While MSU is a Big 10 school and has their fair share of followers, them bowl guys want the big name. Do I think they picked all of the right teams? Hell no. VT was just as undeserving as any, yet went in over Boise and KSU because they're more of a 'name' school.
However, if the situation was flipped (as in UM lost in the title game and MSU got the BCS bid) I don't think you'd be singing the same tune. I realize we had our shot in Indy and put on a hell of a show, but winning was our only shot. I don't agree with it, since it's rewarding teams for finishing good but not 'good enough' (as in winning the division), but the BCS was never fair.
If Michigan State had gotten passed over with an 11-2 record, regardless of who the losses were to, then I think MSU fans would have a valid complaint. If 10-2 is better in the BCS rankings than 10-3, so must 11-2 be better than 10-2, especially since MSU beat Michigan head to head. If that happened, you would room to bitch, and I wouldn't have much to say, since I would know you were right. This wasn't a simple "I hate MSU, bash on them" post.
It would still come down to BCS standings, but I have a hard time believing that an 11-2 MSU team that beat Michigan wouldn't be higher than Michigan in the final BCS standings. However, if that did happen, then wouldn't your real beef be with all of the voters in the USA Today Coaches polls and the computers for not ranking you higher? (remember, AP poll is not part of the BCS calculations)
Notice I haven't made a single comment about Michigan's opponent? I don't think Virginia Tech deserves to be there either...I would have preferred either Kansas State or Boise State over Virginia Tech too.
Look. This is life in a conference with a title game. It's something us Big Ten fans are going to have to get accustomed to. These kinds of situations have happened in other conferences for years. Same thing could happen to Michigan next year. Who knows?
The BCS requires at-large bids to be in the top 14 in BCS standings. MSU's loss to Wisconsin put them below that threshold, because conference title games are counted, while the losses of other teams in other conference title games elevated Michigan over that threshold for the same reason. That's life in the BCS. Michigan got in based on the rules the BCS selection process must follow, and MSU lost out based on the rules the BCS selection process must follow. It is what it is.