wasn’t Seth Davis on national TV, during the selection show, saying we shouldn’t be in? Not exactly mass riots at the NCAA headquarters but there was plenty of backlash not just on social media but media at large.
2 Likes
You’d that a committee that spends the entire season evaluating teams and then like 72 straight hours discussing what teams to put in and where to seed them selecting Michigan would give validation to the full body of their resume but instead its “hey Michigan lost to Indiana and Texas A&M went to their championship game and Michigan is 17-14 so they should be out”
1 Like
Which is why i said it doesnt mean the general populace. As far as the media, honestly don’t know what came first the chicken or the egg. There were at least 1-2 I remember saying Michigan shouldn’t be in. BUT the talk track around Michigan in some areas of the media has morphed into “Many said Michigan shouldn’t have been in here but they have proven it.” Whether that’s because they actually didn’t think Michigan should be in on selection sunday, or its just become the media narrative around Michigan due to Michigan’s own comments is something I’m not sure of.
1 Like
Yeah, this is what I’m talking about more recently. It’s just like a cute story and a narrative because U-M was one of the last teams in the field. I assume all the same stuff was written last year about UCLA.
1 Like
Caleb Houstan is really oblivious to how hot the mics are.
If all you knew about Michigan was their record prior to Selection Sunday, I could understand the skepticism. Especially from casual fans who don’t know any better.
But we’ve won two games as underdogs to higher seeds, and came from behind in both to win by decent margins. How in the world could anyone argue rationally that we don’t belong?
If anything, our performance is an argument that the selection committee was completely justified in putting us in.
Top 35 Kenpom all season, top 25 on Bart, Top 35 NET. We ‘deserve’ to be there.
3 Likes
Of course we deserve to be there. If someone watched our tourney games and still disagrees, I’d love to hear their argument. It’s not gonna be persuasive.
2 Likes
I think there’s a difference between “good enough to be in the tourney” and “deserves to be in the tourney”. It’s a small difference but I can understand that argument.
BUT I think Michigan qualifies in both categories. You are right, the first thing people see is the record and they consider it a disqualifier without considering the circumstances behind not every 17-14 team being equal.
1 Like