Chance to match Michigan up with either Frankie or Zeb/BJ and they blew it. Give the people what they want
5 Likes
Well, theyāll face at least VCU or ASU. Just not both.
2 Likes
Yeah I wanted both. Oh well. Elite ACC opponent it is
1 Like
5 Likes
Is Pitt that bad?
They were 195th on KenPom and Torvik last season. Bart has them projected 121st for the upcoming season.
Theyāre also coached by known dingus Jeff Capel.
5 Likes
#DingusAlert
4 Likes
itās a bad OOC schedule for NCAA seeding purposes. It combines several very loseable games against tough opponents with absolute patsies at home that will drag down our OOC SOS numbers in the computers. So when they put those stupid graphics up with our resume, we will end up looking like we played an easier OOC schedule despite several tough games. A smarter way to do it is to play a bunch of teams in the 100-150 range that are not likely to be losses but also look a lot tougher to the computers.
Gotta win at least 2/3 of Kentucky, UNC, and Virginia IMHO or our OOC resume will be a relative drag in March.
So the reality is that everyone is going to play some buy games at this level. I donāt think thatās a huge issue. Is there maybe one extra? Sure, but doing stuff like EMU on a neutral or PVAM on a neutral is okay.
Q1A games like UK and UNC are win/win. They donāt hurt you if you lose. The pressure games are the in-betweens: UVA (Q1), Pitt, VCU/ASU.
I think youād rather play 3 Q4 games compared to 4, but it is what it is.
Scheduling all 100 ranked teams might be āoptimalā from a NET/SOS perspective, but it isnāt really optimal from a high-major school like Michiganās perspective. You want to play in big games, you want to play in high profile events, you want to make money. You donāt need to optimize your NET/SOS as much as some mid-majors do.
1 Like
I feel like this schedule is partly a reaction to last year. That schedule never let the team get comfortable. This schedule should allow for that while also giving the chance for some marquee games and wins.
Keep in mind too, they have to get 2 B1G games in there. That Minnesota game was a huge anchor on our resume last year. And coming off a game in London is going to be a tricky spot to throw those games in.
1 Like
I donāt really think it is that different. Iād probably tier it something like this:
So basically, U-M didnāt replace the at UCF game with something as or more difficult. Instead, it added an extra Q4 game (CMU/JSU).
Is there that big of a difference between Lipscomb and Southern Utah? Could EMU be significantly better than PV AM? I think probably.
3 Likes
Preach, well said in Five Thoughts.
We may not end up seeing Emoni vs Michigan.
1 Like
Antās Emoni stuff hasnāt quite been on point so idk. BQ said Emoniās team says heās still going to be at EMU, but at the same time I donāt think Emoniās team is trustworthy either haha
5 Likes
Has EMU ever made any public comments about Emoni? Press release, tweet, etc.
This has a bit of a Nojel Eastern feel to it. āIām committed to ____!ā Meanwhile school administrators are scratching their head and trying to figure out what that means.
2 Likes
it is the sub 250/300 games that are killers and you absolutely do not need to schedule them. Play teams in the 200 range if you want to. They are still wins and they arenāt the same anchor on your OOC SOS.
Sure other teams also do it. But there is no need to. Why not schedule smarter and eke out every advantage we can?
Besides it is not like the fans are clamoring to watch these games.
1 Like
Torvik has everyone on the schedule at 265th or better with EMU (neutral) at 265.
Michigan only plays one team from a bottom-five league (Jackson State) so Iām not really sure you can say that they arenāt maximizing their buy games to some extent. MAC schools and playing one on a neutral is better than 3-4 MEAC/SWAC schools.
And yes, you have to play buy games as a high major team to fill out the schedule and provide a bit of balance. There are only so many teams that are going to come play at your place the day before Thanksgiving, for example.
Iād much rather see U-M replace the UCF game with a home-and-home than worry about incrementally better buy games but it seems like thatās been replaced by the Charlotte series more than anything.
Last yearās bottom 3 opponents on KenPom were #s 281, 212, and 162.
Next years opponents had 5 teams ranked worse than #230. Now sure there might be some improvements somewhere, but it shapes up to be infinitely worse at the bottom than last season.
Yeah, as I posted up above, thereās one extra buy game (replacing UCF):
You basically flop Tarleton State + UCF for CMU + Jackson State.
I donāt think thereās that much difference between Southern Utah and Lipscomb if weāre being honest.
Last yearās schedule also feels unrealistically weighted to not having Q4 games because one was canceled.
So replacing UCF with CMU is definitely a downgrade but U-M had one of the 2 or 3 toughest non-conf SOS in the country last year among high majors and it turned out that playing a true road game over Christmas break was a disaster 
ā¦ and they have to fit in a trip to London.
7 Likes
Last year Southern Utah was nearly as good as Nebraska and would have been a 6 pt favorite on a neutral court over Lipscomb.
It irritates me mildly when we do not schedule optimally. This is not football where you are scheduling games 5-10 years in advance. It is an easy area we should be able to exploit.
Is it a big deal to not do soā¦no. But that doesnāt mean it is correct.
1 Like