Louisville lost their minds in the second half and overtime. Rozier took so many terrible shots, and they never seemed to dump it into Harrell despite the fact that Schilling and Costello were either in foul trouble or out of the game. That bracket was the weakest in the tournament by a decent margin.
Man, Trice’s mom and that incessant banshee howling. OMG!
Louisville, sort of like MSU in the 1st half, took a lot of bad shots which helped fuel MSU’s offense in the 2nd half.
Louisville lost their minds in the second half and overtime. Rozier took so many terrible shots, and they never seemed to dump it into Harrell despite the fact that Schilling and Costello were either in foul trouble or out of the game. That bracket was the weakest in the tournament by a decent margin.
Duke/Gonzaga’s region was much weaker. Izzo is simply a legend, and hands down the best coach in the conference (although we’ll see in the next few years if he can overcome Matta’s recent recruiting tear).
2 Big 10 teams in the Final Four.
Louisville lost their minds in the second half and overtime. Rozier took so many terrible shots, and they never seemed to dump it into Harrell despite the fact that Schilling and Costello were either in foul trouble or out of the game. That bracket was the weakest in the tournament by a decent margin.Duke/Gonzaga’s region was much weaker. Izzo is simply a legend, and hands down the best coach in the conference (although we’ll see in the next few years if he can overcome Matta’s recent recruiting tear).
Strongly disagree that the Duke-Gonzaga region was weaker. Villanova was by far the weakest one. UVa fell off down the stretch after the Anderson injury and was the weakest or 2nd weakest 2 (I did not think KU would make much noise). OU was a weaker 3-seed than ISU (worse record than ISU, 1-2 head-to-head against ISU, and worse personnel). Both 4 seeds were fairly bad. I’ll give Louisville the slight edge over G’Town, but Louisville was not nearly as good once they lost Jones.
Izzo is a very good coach. I won’t argue that. I don’t like him at all–for many reasons–but he has his team playing their best basketball when it counts. It is my opinion, though, that they wouldn’t have made it past the 2nd round in any other region.
< It is my opinion, though, that they wouldn't have made it past the 2nd round in any other region.
That’s not opinion, its a fact. Three one seeds and a 7 seed in the four makes the point pretty clear.
< It is my opinion, though, that they wouldn't have made it past the 2nd round in any other region.That’s not opinion, its a fact. Three one seeds and a 7 seed in the four makes the point pretty clear.
No, that’s an opinion, just like when OSU was picked for the playoff, every UM fan gave their opinion that Alabama would wipe the floor with them. MSU beat the 2, 3, and 4 seed in their region. You don’t get to discount their wins just because you don’t like them. Or if you do, then I assume you do the same for the Fab Five’s run as a 6 seed. Or for two years ago when UM had no business beating Kansas and didn’t have to play Georgetown.
< It is my opinion, though, that they wouldn't have made it past the 2nd round in any other region.That’s not opinion, its a fact. Three one seeds and a 7 seed in the four makes the point pretty clear.
No, that’s an opinion, just like when OSU was picked for the playoff, every UM fan gave their opinion that Alabama would wipe the floor with them. MSU beat the 2, 3, and 4 seed in their region. You don’t get to discount their wins just because you don’t like them. Or if you do, then I assume you do the same for the Fab Five’s run as a 6 seed. Or for two years ago when UM had no business beating Kansas and didn’t have to play Georgetown.
Why did we have no business in beating Kansas?
They missed a FT at the end that would have sealed it, hmm sounds familiar.
The seeding doesn’t mean too much when the lower seed was actually favored in the last two games.
< It is my opinion, though, that they wouldn't have made it past the 2nd round in any other region.That’s not opinion, its a fact. Three one seeds and a 7 seed in the four makes the point pretty clear.
No, that’s an opinion, just like when OSU was picked for the playoff, every UM fan gave their opinion that Alabama would wipe the floor with them. MSU beat the 2, 3, and 4 seed in their region. You don’t get to discount their wins just because you don’t like them. Or if you do, then I assume you do the same for the Fab Five’s run as a 6 seed. Or for two years ago when UM had no business beating Kansas and didn’t have to play Georgetown.
I don’t think anyone is discounting their wins. A win is a win. They won 4 and are in the final 4. I just think they had an easier path than they would have in any other region. I don’t think they would have beaten Gonzaga or Arizona in the 2nd round. They might have beaten KU, but they wouldn’t have beaten ND.
< It is my opinion, though, that they wouldn't have made it past the 2nd round in any other region.That’s not opinion, its a fact. Three one seeds and a 7 seed in the four makes the point pretty clear.
No, that’s an opinion, just like when OSU was picked for the playoff, every UM fan gave their opinion that Alabama would wipe the floor with them. MSU beat the 2, 3, and 4 seed in their region. You don’t get to discount their wins just because you don’t like them. Or if you do, then I assume you do the same for the Fab Five’s run as a 6 seed. Or for two years ago when UM had no business beating Kansas and didn’t have to play Georgetown.
Why did we have no business in beating Kansas?
They missed a FT at the end that would have sealed it, hmm sounds familiar.
The seeding doesn’t mean too much when the lower seed was actually favored in the last two games.
Kansas was the more talented team, our comeback required a collapse that only a Bill Self team could pull off, coupled with perfect play from UM down the stretch. As long as we’re discounting MSU’s latest Final Four, let’s play the “what if?” game with everybody.
If seeding doesn’t mean too much, then how does “Three one seeds and a 7 seed in the four make the point pretty clear.”?
< It is my opinion, though, that they wouldn't have made it past the 2nd round in any other region.That’s not opinion, its a fact. Three one seeds and a 7 seed in the four makes the point pretty clear.
No, that’s an opinion, just like when OSU was picked for the playoff, every UM fan gave their opinion that Alabama would wipe the floor with them. MSU beat the 2, 3, and 4 seed in their region. You don’t get to discount their wins just because you don’t like them. Or if you do, then I assume you do the same for the Fab Five’s run as a 6 seed. Or for two years ago when UM had no business beating Kansas and didn’t have to play Georgetown.
Why did we have no business in beating Kansas?
They missed a FT at the end that would have sealed it, hmm sounds familiar.
The seeding doesn’t mean too much when the lower seed was actually favored in the last two games.
Kansas was the more talented team, our comeback required a collapse that only a Bill Self team could pull off, coupled with perfect play from UM down the stretch. As long as we’re discounting MSU’s latest Final Four, let’s play the “what if?” game with everybody.
If seeding doesn’t mean too much, then how does “Three one seeds and a 7 seed in the four make the point pretty clear.”?
Alum05’s post is basically my stance as well.
FWIW, only two teams in the tournament had to play 3 teams in KenPom’s top 20.
Notre Dame: (#20 Butler, #10 Wichita State, #1 Kentucky)
Michigan State: (#5 Virginia, #13 Oklahoma, #16 Louisville)
You can make the argument that UVA with the Anderson injury is a different team, that’s understandable and MSU definitely avoided the best of the best (Duke/Kentucky) up until now, but I’ll give credit where credit is due. This is a hell of a run they’ve got going IMO from a team that many didn’t even expect to make the tournament when we took them to OT on their home floor.
FWIW, only two teams in the tournament had to play 3 teams in KenPom's top 20.Notre Dame: (#20 Butler, #10 Wichita State, #1 Kentucky)
Michigan State: (#5 Virginia, #13 Oklahoma, #16 Louisville)You can make the argument that UVA with the Anderson injury is a different team, that’s understandable and MSU definitely avoided the best of the best (Duke/Kentucky) up until now, but I’ll give credit where credit is due. This is a hell of a run they’ve got going IMO from a team that many didn’t even expect to make the tournament when we took them to OT on their home floor.
They are a 7 seed in the final 4. By virtue of their seeding, they are almost guaranteed to have a tougher road to the final 4 than a 1 seed. Literally no one has said that they had the easiest path. What I said is that they were in the easiest region, and that they wouldn’t have made it past the 2nd round in any other region (maybe they would have beaten KU, but they would have lost to ND).
Also, in addition to UVa being a different team, Louisville is definitely worse without Jones.
Look, a Final 4 is a Final 4. Their banner won’t have an asterisk. They are playing their best basketball right now, but they got a big break when the brackets were announced.
Unless you can provide concrete evidence then it is nothing but rampant speculation and slander.
Ha ha ha. That’s adorable.
This attitude that everybody cheats but us and that nobody deals with attrition except us is borderline pathetic. Please, let me know when someone reputable has actual proof that whatever team people are accusing of cheating is actually cheating and not, you know, simply recruiting at a high level.
I didn’t make either claim, but that’s a nice straw man. Also didn’t realize you were the sole arbiter of who’s cheating and who’s not. Regardless…it’s cool…go ahead and believe whatever you’d like to believe. Doesn’t matter either way.
Unless you can provide concrete evidence then it is nothing but rampant speculation and slander.Ha ha ha. That’s adorable.
This attitude that everybody cheats but us and that nobody deals with attrition except us is borderline pathetic. Please, let me know when someone reputable has actual proof that whatever team people are accusing of cheating is actually cheating and not, you know, simply recruiting at a high level.I didn’t make either claim, but that’s a nice straw man. Also didn’t realize you were the sole arbiter of who’s cheating and who’s not. Regardless…it’s cool…go ahead and believe whatever you’d like to believe. Doesn’t matter either way.
I mean, you know what else doesn’t matter? Whether these schools are cheating or not because as far as I can see, we remain one of the few programs sanctioned for major NCAA violations in the past twenty five years and all these other ‘cheaters’ seem to be doing a good job of covering it up. We can cry foul all we want based on rumors and hearsay but until Kentucky or Arizona get scholarships docked, nobody really cares about the degree to which they’re cheating as they will continue to get those top 25 recruits.
You sound like an SEC football fan.
I do think one of the reasons Michigan fans are particularly sensitive about cheating is precisely because we did pay a heavy price for our sins and want others held to the same standard. Of course, the only reason Michigan got “caught” is because Ed Martin dabbled in illegal things that landed him into the realm of subpoena power.
However, I’d also like to think that the difference between Michigan and Kentucky (http://www.nytimes.com/1989/05/20/sports/kentucky-s-basketball-program-and-2-players-heavily-penalized.html) is that we actually care about integrity. The Michigan Difference and all.
So, you might not “care” but plenty of folks do.
Voltron that’s possible but Michigan fell on the sword and allowed the basketball program to decay. Other schools stonewall and show solidarity and the NCAA can’t get anything on them. Some might call it integrity but there’s also a chance of it being arrogance. Michigan wants to think they are above the fray and would never dabble in grey areas or be associated with certain people. I still want the basketball program to do well but the powers that be all but guaranteed Michigan will never be in the upper cusp of basketball royalty again.
I mean, if Michigan fell on the sword and others don’t, then doesn’t that mean they are “above the fray”? It might not have been “smart” but I do think it allows for the moral high ground. Perhaps I don’t understand your contention about arrogance.
I also disagree with the last sentiment. We obviously could have won a national title and will be in position to do that again. How else are we not able to be in the upper cusp? Clearly I think the deck is stacked against us, but that doesn’t mean we still can’t do it (and then feel great about how we did it).
I mean, if Michigan fell on the sword and others don't, then doesn't that mean they *are* "above the fray"? It might not have been "smart" but I do think it allows for the moral high ground. Perhaps I don't understand your contention about arrogance.I also disagree with the last sentiment. We obviously could have won a national title and will be in position to do that again. How else are we not able to be in the upper cusp? Clearly I think the deck is stacked against us, but that doesn’t mean we still can’t do it (and then feel great about how we did it).
We doubled down on the punishments and effectively shunned our own basketball program for about a decade on the basis of morality defined by the NCAA. It’s arrogant to think that we are the flag bearers of moral rectitude and assume that other, more prestigious programs are succeeding only because they break the rules and thereby don’t meet those standards.
“I didn’t make either claim, but that’s a nice straw man.”
You might not have said it earlier, but you literally spelled it out just now so my powers of deduction were not faulty, it seems.