March 14th, 2022 at 11:27 AM ^
As much as I like to rip on my MSU buddies about this, the NCAA does recognize 68 teams in the official tournament. It's called the "First Four", not the "play-in" games.
Also, the NCAA's official website still acknowledges MSU as having the second longest tournaments made streak as well: LINK
68 teams make the tournament now, unfortunately.
Sorry to burst some people's uh, bubble. :)
68 teams make it to the NCAA Tournament, the play in teams made it.
https://www.ncaa.com/news/basketball-men/article/2021-01-15/how-field-6…
Sorry to burst some people's bubble.
The game is called a "play in" game.
What are they "playing" to get "in" to? The tournament.
March 14th, 2022 at 10:14 AM ^
Good thing it's called the "First Four".
March 14th, 2022 at 10:28 AM ^
The problem with this argument is some teams that were automatic qualifiers (winning their conference tournament) are playing in so-called "play in" games. If they automatically qualified, what did they automatically qualify for, if not the tournament?
Examples:
Texas A&M-Corpus Christi, who won the Southland, is playing Texas Southern, who won the SWAC, in Dayton on Tuesday.
Wright State, who won the Horizon, is playing Bryant, who won the NEC, in Dayton on Wednesday.
March 14th, 2022 at 11:20 AM ^
i'm pretty sure the ncaa changed the terminology a few years ago to "first four" to indicate that those teams are, in fact, part of the tournament field.
Very few teams play the kind of schedule Michigan just did
Last time I checked UM beat Iowa once (on the road by a lot), beat MSU once, beat OSU once (on the road without Dickinson), beat San Diego State, beat Purdue once when they were ranked #3 (by a lot), beat IU once by a lot (on the road). We have been inconsistent but have some huge victories.
March 14th, 2022 at 11:23 AM ^
i didn't double check, but i believe all but two of our losses are to tourny teams; cent fla and minny. i would bet that nearly all the teams seeded 5 and lower have as many or more than that.
March 14th, 2022 at 12:55 PM ^
Yeah lots of clowns on r/collegebasketball making jokes about 'who cares about SoS if you lose all your games?? lmaooo' while conveniently ignoring that we have a healthy number of good wins
Michigan was in once they beat OSU on the road. Anyone on this board trying to point out otherwise had no clue what they were talking about. Metrics have a huge say now when before it was BPI only.
Teams have made it in the tournament with under .500 records but they were automatic qualifiers.
Not since last year has a team made the tourney with three games over .500
FIFY
I know nothing about op but everything about this post makes him sound like a Sparty
Lol wut? MSU was 15-13 last year.
Jerry Palm is that you?
Metrics supported Michigan's inclusion in the tournament and they'd be 18-14 if the IPFW game hadn't been canceled. Four games over .500 helps the optics, but that's about it.
Pays to play a tough schedule, something the committee has very recently been adamant about being important.
Lots of debate....among those named Mike Valenti
"I don't give a fuck!!!"
-Smokey
Such a tired narrative...I'd be willing to bet no 3-games-over-500 team since 2001 had our quality of wins nor did they have a sure win (IPFW) cancelled mid-season.
The reality of a 68-team tournament is that many flawed teams make it in. This Michigan team has an extremely high upside, and just as easily as they could come out flat and lose to CSU, if they come out like they did @OSU or at home vs Purdue, there isn't a single team in the field they cannot beat. 11-seeds have made the Final Four, as recently as (shudders) last year.
As bad as Michigan has played this year I would pick them to beat CSU. If you look at CSU schedule they have not beat anyone. Our record sucks but our SOS and quality of wins are great. So I think we deserve to be rewarded for challenging ourselves.
March 14th, 2022 at 10:01 AM ^
OT: As of now, Michigan, Notre Dame and Ohio State are the only teams that could have men’s and women’s basketball teams and men’s hockey teams playing in NCAA tournaments this season.
Because Ohio State’s women’s hockey team is in the Women’s NCAA tournament, we have to be rooting for their men’s hockey team, currently 15th in the Pairwise, to slip out of the NCAA tournament. So, we should be rooting for Clarkson (16th in the Pairwise) to beat Harvard in the ECAC hockey tournament and maybe upset Quinnipiac (7th in the Pairwise and the top-ranked eastern team) in the championship game.
March 14th, 2022 at 11:01 AM ^
Rivalries create such strange bedfellows.
Let's go, Golden Knights! Defeat the Crimson! Then take out the Bobcats!
It’s not that surprising of a stat really. There’s only 60 mens hockey teams to begin with, a rather large amount of which aren’t D1 schools in basketball.
As for OSU hockey making the tournament, their odds aren’t great. You’re already guaranteed one autobid making it in below the 16 cutoff from the Atlantic. Which currently would make OSU the last at-large, and they’re still sweating out the ECAC tournament(Clarkson #16, Harvard #23, Colgate #31), Hockey East (UConn #19), and CCHA (Bemidji State #29) potentially as bid stealers. Clarkson beating Harvard might even put them ahead of OSU and then losing to Quinnipiac in the title game might not knock them back below OSU, keeping the at large bid with Clarkson. The numbers would be pretty interesting in that scenario.
March 14th, 2022 at 10:07 AM ^
Beat CSU
March 14th, 2022 at 10:17 AM ^
Only MSU fans are worried about our record...
March 14th, 2022 at 10:42 AM ^
I was super depressed after the Indiana game, did not think they would make it in, and thought they would lose promptly if they did.
Now, four days later and with nothing in between on which to alter my opinion, I am pretty certain Michigan is going to win the national title.
March 14th, 2022 at 10:59 AM ^
Hope springs eternal and good for you.
You sound like Jake from Ann Arbor (so you're not alone)
March 14th, 2022 at 10:44 AM ^
That's absolutely false, see last year when 4 teams did.
Welp, that was easy to debunk.
Agreed, this thread is totally inaccurate and the OP did not do their homework.
March 14th, 2022 at 10:56 AM ^
Whatever, so this is not a precedent. It just means that this a quite rare but not totally unheard of.
Let's get that win on Thursday-Go Blue!
March 14th, 2022 at 11:01 AM ^
When is the last time a Big Ten team with a winning conference record failed to make the tournament?
March 14th, 2022 at 11:08 AM ^
Lol are we just going to forgot last year? MSU and maryland...
Maryland and MSU had losing conference records last year. I was asking when was the last time a Big Ten team with a winning conference record (as we do this year) failed to get in?
March 14th, 2022 at 11:11 AM ^
The only real debate I saw was around here by a couple of individuals almost intentionally being negative who then quietly started posting super-positive things about UM (or in this case, a weird message board post that is factually incorrect since MSU did it last year) and hoping nobody would notice.
March 14th, 2022 at 11:17 AM ^
I was being negative. Guilty. I wasn't doing it intentionally, I have just become really attached to this team for some reason and was just really depressed about the IU game (and was drinking beer like it was water for two days starting Thursday at 11:30 AM).
March 14th, 2022 at 11:47 AM ^
I get that and I wasn't specifically thinking of you (or really anyone). It was more that as soon as literally anything in those rooting interest threads didn't go UM's way there was this stream of "welcome to the NIT" and "this team just got bounced" despite ample evidence that UM wasn't really close to the cut line compared to other teams. Like, I saw multiple people both here and elsewhere argue that somehow Rutgers was ahead of UM in the pecking order based on really no evidence, or that Oklahoma with it's 7-11 record in the Big 12 was a much better candidate that UM.
I get that I'm a sunshine up your ass type of guy around these parts but I thought the uncertainty was UM going to Dayton first vs. just being seeded 11, not if they got in at all.
March 14th, 2022 at 11:20 AM ^
You know people are talking….
March 14th, 2022 at 11:56 AM ^
68 teams --- the committee has to find all those teams somewhere.
And those last teams in invariably come with their warts and flaws. It happens every year, if those last teams weren't flawed they wouldn't be an 11 or 12 seed. That is what it is.
The Eagles were a very good NFL team in 2021, but the NFC needed 7 playoff teams. Shoot, the Cincinnati Reds (as a fan, I realize them to be the definition of a flawed baseball franchise) almost made the NL playoffs last year because the NL needed 5 playoff teams.
March 14th, 2022 at 12:34 PM ^
Check again. Michigan State was 15-12 last year (first four game, but still in). Their NET ranking, not sure if it was before or after the tournament, was 76.
P.S. One interesting tidbit about this year - based on the released seeding by the NCAA, Michigan was 42nd. After them were Wyoming, Rutgers, Indiana, Virginia Tech, and Notre Dame. Since Va Tech won their tournament, they were exempt from the First Four...meaning, Michigan was the last at-large team that didn't have to play in the First Four.
Since Va Tech won their tournament, they were exempt from the First Four
De facto, yes, but not de jure. While four of the eight First Four spots go to the four lowest ranked at-large teams (i.e. not VT as an AQ), the other four go the four lowest ranked teams overall, which are all AQs. So it's possible, although exceedingly unlikely, that a major conference tournament could be won by an abysmal team that ranked among the worst four in the field. I'm always rooting for some single-digit win team to go on a run and get an auto-bid.
As an aside, it's never felt quite right that teams that won their tournament have to play in play-in games. Bubble teams, sure, but it's kind of a slap in the face to AQs. And honestly if it were up to me, I'd just go back to a 64 team field. The world isn't going to end if there are four fewer at-large teams in the field.
De facto, yes, but not de jure
wtf does this mean, I don't speak dutch
Sorry, yes. Va Tech did avoid the 16 vs 16 matchup.
It's great to be a Michigan Wolverine.
Look, either you use the metrics or you don't.
The metrics ALL said we deserved to be in. You can argue the metrics are wrong. But if the metrics are being used, then we deserve to be in.
That’s really a moot talking point considering we had one game cancelled against IUPUI that would have put us 4 games above .500. Pretty weak metric to use when arguing teams for the tourney but I recognize you have to win games to get there.
So if Purdue Fort Wayne didn’t have to cancel the game and Michigan was 18-14 instead of 17-14, would that make Michigan’s selection less debated?