They’re not? Interesting. Let us know what to re-watch for?
1 Like
You’re a “huge fan” of Michigan and yet seem to be able to stay objective in your analysis… I don’t think that lets Bart off the hook for this particular malady.
2 Likes
I agree with the fact that metrics give Michigan a very good shot here. But the comparison to MSU last year falls flat for me cuz MSU really did play their way in. Yes, they were 2-2 in the final four regular season games, but they only lost one game in the final month that wasn’t to the #2 team in the country on the road, and they were 5-2 in that prolonged span.
If Michigan had a three week stretch like that this year, we wouldn’t even be debating if they’re in, we’d know they are. Came close to feeling like that was coming before the Madison meltdown happened. That’s why I just think 2-1 has to happen this week. Don’t see a situation where they’re anything other than a 50/50 toss up on selection Sunday if they go 1-2, barring a run to the final of the BTT.
But I’m also not a bracketology person at all so I trust what smarter folks say. I’ll just truly be stunned if they end up in without getting hot here.
You mean 
Wisc in next round after IU?
1 Like
MSU was horrible in the NET rankings last year. They were in the 70s. They were 3-10 away from Breslin. They had a 13 game stretch where they went 4-9 (with 2 of the wins being Nebraska). MSU needed those big late wins just to sneak into the first four. They had 5 Q1 wins (which is the same as Michigan would have with 1 more win and if Michigan wins 2 more they will have more Q1s than MSU). February/March games don’t count more than January. It’s all a part of the resume. Michigan is way better in the NET than MSU was last year. Not hard to see why they’d be viewed in a similar or better light by the committee when it comes down to selection. However I didn’t pay close attention to how strong or weak the bubble was last year since Michigan was nowhere near it.
Hopefully Michigan goes 2-1 this week and then it doesn’t matter.
4 Likes
Also, is recent form even a consideration for the committee with the exception of multiple players returning from injury?
Not sure MSU’s finish to the season last year had any impact besides improving their overall resume.
1 Like
It’s explicitly stated as no longer being a criteria.
I think UM should be in good shape with a pair of wins this week. But I also think a loss to Northwestern or something in Indy could set that back.
Similarly, two Q1 wins in Indy (Indiana and the 1 seed) would probably do a lot to boost UM’s resume. Not sure what that means when the dust settles but that would do a lot IMO.
2 Likes
I just got done hosting this bracketology show we do on the field of 68 every week. Inside the Hall’s bracketology expert Andy was on - I essentially posed this exact scenario to him for Michigan (win 1 of the final 3, win 2 straight in BTT) and he seemed to think they’d for sure be in if that happens. Around the 25 minute mark if anyone wants to see that portion. I didn’t do the best job posing it as a clear hypothetical but I think he got what I was going for after a minute 
2 Likes
So you’re saying we should lose on purpose in order to get some revenge 
Well, it seems that we definitively want Wisconsin to beat Purdue tomorrow to get the 1 seed. If we finish at 1-2 or even 0-3, the upper half of the bracket with Wisconsin would be more favorable if we are in a win and in position on Friday.
I guess Caleb’s 42 points in 2 games wasn’t enough for frosh of the week unless M Caleb being punished for Juwan slap in Wisc.
Iowa defense getting ready for a stretch run! It’s a whole new day for Fran.
2 Likes
I am usually the first to rip on Fran, but gotta give him some credit here. No chance I would have seen this coming from Iowa.
BUT lets not proclaim them as a defensive juggernaut quite yet. This could have a lot to do with Northwestern and their typical complete falling apart at the end of the year.
1 Like
This is the most “if the rule that you followed led you to this, of what use was the rule” moment of my life.
3 Likes
Worth noting looking ahead to Thursday:
They’re actually quite different, but most easy to explain is the ending of each. Davison is basically stationary on the weak side until he curls off a single pindown.
In the Michigan play, Brooks is a baseline runner who comes off two screens — one on each block — before receiving the pass.
1 Like
One thing I can’t get out of my head on the recent Greg Gard discussion… Wisconsin was essentially Michigan last year, right? Preseason No. 7 and finished .500 in the Big Ten?
5 Likes
So what you are saying is that Michigan will win the Big Ten next season with a mediocre efficiency margin next year? Or is Juwan> Gard so we will win it with an above average efficiency margin?
But yes- I do see the comparison and I think “consistency in college basketball is extremely difficult” is an important lesson. Makes (Gulp) MSU that much more impressive that they can keep their NBA players around for so long (for whatever reason).
1 Like
Well, Michigan last year was more like Wisconsin this year (only they were a really good EM team with a really good record, not just a good record with a weak EM) in that they weren’t really preseason top 20 or anything and ended up top 10.
I get that Miles Bridges happened, but it isn’t like MSU’s recent rosters have been loaded with multi-year pros.
It’s not like Aaron Henry was passing up on being a first round pick to come back. I feel like that narrative is a little overblown.
1 Like
Recency bias is something else
1 Like