Punching The Ticket: Yes, That Was Bad Comment Count

Ace


Same. [Bryan Fuller/MGoBlog]

Surprise! Getting four cracks at a fourth top-100 victory only to fall short in all of them is bad for a team's NCAA Tournament chances. Michigan was already in a precarious spot heading into the weekend; after falling to Iowa, they need at least two wins in the Big Ten Tournament to avoid missing the dance for the second straight season.

Michigan's resumé as it currently stands:

Record: 20-11 (19-11 vs. D-I), 10-8 Big Ten
RPI: 70
KenPom: 54
RPI Strength of Schedule: 69
KP SOS: 54
RPI Top-50: 3-9
RPI 51-100: 0-2
RPI 101+: 16-0

Unless Penn State (#114) pulls some upsets in the BTT—they draw Ohio State in the second round for the right to play Michigan State—Michigan isn't going to pick up any more RPI top-100 victories without an upset over Indiana; that, of course, would require the Wolverines to beat Northwestern on Thursday, which KenPom projects has a 57% chance of happening.

Of the 89 brackets currently comprising the Bracket Matrix, Michigan makes only 46 of them, and the more recently updated brackets almost all omit the Wolverines; they're the second team left out of the field in the consensus. After updating his bracket last night, CBS's Jerry Palm placed M as one of the first four teams out, citing the lack of quality wins as the primary reason they're not in:

Michigan has fallen off the bracket for now. The Wolverines lost at home to Iowa 71-61 on Saturday to fall to 3-9 against the top 50, 3-11 against the top 100 and 10-11 against the top 200.

Those are all bad numbers. Michigan will have a lot of work to do in Indianapolis at the Big Ten tournament.

Michigan fell off the Yahoo big board. They're the fourth team out to ESPN's Joe Lunardi. Notably, Michigan is projected to miss the tourney before accounting for the inevitable bid-stealers that will arise from the conference tournaments this week. Even if the Wolverines get a lot of help from other bubble teams, it's difficult to see a path to the tournament that doesn't involve a victory against Indiana.

I guess I'll post a rooting guide anyway. Teams you want are in bold, bubble teams are in italics.

  • Monmouth vs. Iona (MAAC championship) (tonight, 7 pm, ESPN)
  • Green Bay vs. Valparaiso (Horizon semifinal) (tonight, 7 pm, ESPNU)
  • Pepperdine vs. St. Mary's (WCC semifinal) (tonight, 9 pm, ESPN)
  • BYU vs. Gonzaga (WCC semifinal) (tonight, 11:30 pm, ESPN2)*
  • Syracuse vs. Pittsburgh (ACC 2nd round) (Wednesday, noon, ESPN)
  • Washington State vs. Colorado (Pac-12 1st round) (Wednesday, 5:30, Pac-12 Network)
  • UCLA vs. USC (Pac-12 1st round) (Wednesday, 9 pm, Pac-12 Network)
  • Arizona State vs. Oregon State (Pac-12 1st round) (Wednesday, 11:30 pm, Pac-12 Network)
  • Arkansas vs. Florida (SEC 2nd round) (Thursday, 1 pm, SEC Network)
  • Butler vs. Providence (Big East quarterfinal) (Thursday, 2:30 pm, FS1)
  • Penn State vs. Ohio State (Big Ten 2nd round) (Thursday, 6:30 pm, ESPN2)

*You want St. Mary's to beat the winner in the title game; both BYU and Gonzaga are on the bubble but the Zags are closer to getting in.

Comments

ak47

March 7th, 2016 at 3:50 PM ^

All the sunshine and rainbows in terms of tourney chances are gone.  I remember when people thought beating northwestern at home and a game in the BTT was a lock to get in.  Glad reality has finally set in.  

ijohnb

March 7th, 2016 at 3:55 PM ^

it looked like a lock then.  21-12 and 10-8 in the BIG historically gets teams into the NCAA tournament.  More competitive mid-majors have changed that dynamic a little bit.  Frankly, I think bracketologists feed off of each other and if one makes a move so does the other and we are just not a favorite right now.  After the Purdue win, it REALLY looked like that would be all if would take but Lunardi and Palm seemed to get really down on Michigan quickly after the Maryland loss.  In all honesty, with our record and the Purdue, Maryland, and Texas wins, I am surprised we are not considered in at this point.

ak47

March 7th, 2016 at 4:01 PM ^

Because we played a turd nonconference schedule and looked like a bad team all year?  -20 wins is generally the bubble cut line.  21-12 and 10-8 has always been a bubble sweat it out place to be especially since the committe no longer looks at conference record since unbalanced schedules skew that so much.  You generally need at least 20 wins to get into the dance but anything around that is dancing with the devil.  There is probably a 25% chance we get in if all we do is beat northwestern.  Plus we will have 20 wins in that scenario DII doesn't count.

ijohnb

March 7th, 2016 at 4:12 PM ^

seen no indication that the D2 win "does not count."  I know that is what everybody says but not even bracketologists are raising the issue and our record is shown as 20 wins on every channel and every website.  I am not disputing your overall point, but that D2 thing does not seem to be playing into anybody's formula.

And I don't think we looked like a "bad" team all year.  Those games that we won actually did happen, and we beat all of the "bad" teams we played.  I get it, Satuirday did not go well but we don't all of the sudden suck worse than anything has ever sucked before.

MH20

March 7th, 2016 at 4:38 PM ^

I could be wrong but I thought that the committee team sheets only list D1 games and are sorted by RPI, meaning that a non-D1 game wouldn't appear because a non-D1 team doesn't have an RPI.

In reply to by ijohnb

Richard75

March 7th, 2016 at 5:33 PM ^

D-II wins don't count because the RPI formula is based on winning percentages—yours, your opponents' and your opponents' opponents'. If you count a D-II team, then you're essentially entwining D-I with D-II.



Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad

schreibee

March 7th, 2016 at 5:10 PM ^

I'd say you'd have to be looking at our record in a vacuum of historical norms for admittance, and not at the team's actual performances on the court if you'd be "surprised" they are not "considered in."

I said this in the last boring bracketology thread, and I'll say it just once more, then probably check out of this entire topic until after the brackets are set:

If it wasn't for the potential damage missing the dance for consecutive seasons could do to the program I could barely care less if this team makes it in... they're really boring, and just stunningly inept for long stretches of every game against any teams with a pulse (and many of those with barely any pulse). If it weren't our team but another school's, I'd be howling at their admission if they got in. Realize that some team wouldn't make it in to admit this one! There is simply no way any other team on the bubble isn't more deserving... sorry, that sucks to say & I'm sure stings to realize.

It's the most disappointed I've felt with any Beilein teams ( well equal to the Manny Harris-DeShawn Sims final team, but that barely feels like it should be considered a "Beilein team.")

I have NO idea why we didn't realize the recruiting bump the consecutive deep tournament runs and multiple early draft entrants would seem sure to bring - but I'm really staring to think those recruits are smarter than we give them credit for!?

 

Richard75

March 7th, 2016 at 5:52 PM ^

Regarding the 10-8 in the B1G: It was obvious all along that 10-8 was no longer a sure thing. All one had to do is look at OSU. They're 11-7 with 19 wins (same number of D-I wins as U-M), and they weren't even on the at-large radar this whole time.

It's pointless to keep bringing up the B1G's past when that past didn't include free wins against the historically awful teams that Rutgers and Minnesota put forward this season. In the five seasons before this one, the B1G didn't have a single team ranked worse than 200th in the RPI. This year they have two...below 250.

The B1G went 31-1 against Rutgers and Minnesota. Remove them from the conference and you'll have a better feel for everyone's true merit. Michigan would be 7-8, which is about right.



Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad

Maizen

March 7th, 2016 at 3:51 PM ^

Hard to believe we were playing for a national title 3 years ago.

Recruiting matters.

What a fall from grace.

UofM Die Hard …

March 8th, 2016 at 12:07 AM ^

Up cycle should be going on right now. Recruiting has been average. I love JB but he has got to get a little dirty on the recruiting front. Ok dirty is the wrong word, um creative I guess, harbaugh doing exactly that and well ... We see what's happening there. With our new AD in town, and in any situation with a new leader coming in, a lot of Those types of people want to make a splash/statement to say I am here and this is the standard so I am very interested to see how this plays out. So damn frustrating, after that NC game we should have been stocked up and ready to roll right now.

matty blue

March 8th, 2016 at 11:22 AM ^

i don't think harbaugh is doing anything remotely "dirty."

what he is doing is unconventional; if beilein wants to do things unconventionally i'd have no problem with it, but "getting dirty" in basketball is a completely different world.  i'd rather be on the bubble than go after one-and-dones and AAU entourage guys.

Maizen

March 7th, 2016 at 4:02 PM ^

Missing the NCAA tournament two years in a row 3 years after playing for a natty is a fall from grace. You can put lipstick on that pig but I won't. JB is on the cusp of missing the NCAA's for the 4th time in 9 years. He's made 1 final 4 in 34 years as a HC. 2013 and 2014 were outliers in an otherwise ordinary career. At WVU he made the tournament 2 times in 5 years. Bob Huggins has made it in 7 of the the last 9 years at WVU.

I'll be shocked if this team ever gets back to the final 4 under JB, and that's too bad because I like the guy, but the recruiting has fallen off a cliff and the defense is abysmal.

I'm hoping for the best but expecting to be let down. 

Time fore Warde to get a list together soon...

N. Campus Tech

March 7th, 2016 at 4:35 PM ^

Bob Huggins had the benefit of not having to rebuild a program and his best years were with Beilein's players.

Beilein's took over a WV program that went 1-15 in the Big East the year before he took over. Huggins took over a team that was 27-9 and had a end of season RPI of 31 (yet somehow missed the tournament, but won the NIT)

ijohnb

March 8th, 2016 at 10:04 AM ^

does not need to be fired, and he certainly does not need to be replaced by Bob Huggins, for God's sake.  He needs to adapt, the question is, will he? 

1) He needs to develop a defensive identity, I know most are opposed, but I say go back to the 1-3-1.  Yes, I know teams have scouted it.  Yes, I know that we typically don't look great in it but we don't play it a lot so of course we are not going to look like experts right away.  However, it was effective against Iowa, it can force turnover that can result in open looks, and Beilein is just not a good fundamental man to man defensive coach.  Bring back the zone JB, give it a whirl. 

2) This "stretch wing" playing the 4 will not do.  GR 3 was uniquely suited to play such a hybrid position but there was always dribble penetration that lead to open shots and he was athletic enough to hold his own defensively.  Conversely, take a player like Zak Irvin who could an ideal wing player and who is at least a respectable defender.  One problem, HE CAN'T GUARD THE 4, he is not big enough or strong enough.  There is a reason Jalen Brown, Tyus Battle, et. al. are not coming here.  They don't want Jared Uteof and Nigel Hayes abusing them in the post and shooting 3s right over the top of their head. 

Additionally, he is asked to be the primary creator on offense from a position that is designed to be a slasher/shooter.  Look closely at our offense, whenever you see Zak Irvin with an iso at the top of the key the offense has failed miserably.  That is not in his skill set.  People are getting irate with Irvin but he is being asked to do 6 different things and create offense out of nothing.   It does not work and he (who I believe could be a really good wing player in a more traditional offense with a post presense) is getting exasperated by it.  Beilein has to begin recruiting actual power forwards who can create inside and get offensive boards to kick out if he wants to last in this conference. 

I think Beilein is a great coach and an ideal individual to represent the university.  I also think he is very stubborn and set in his ways.  I think he needs to recalculated and recalibrate a few things if he wants to right this ship. 

 

HollywoodHokeHogan

March 8th, 2016 at 2:40 PM ^

Irvin gets a bad rap because he's playing the wrong position and expected to do a million different things on offense because nobody else can drive to the basket.  I think GR3 had his draft propsects hurt by JB doing the same thing.  It's not at all surprising that bigger 3s don't want to play for Michigan-- you'll get stuck playing the 4. 

ak47

March 7th, 2016 at 4:03 PM ^

Good programs don't have 2-3 years of missing the tourney.  If we miss the tourney this year in Beileins nine years we have made the tournament five times and missed it 4 times.  Batting .500 on making the ncaa tournament isn't a good look.

Maizen

March 7th, 2016 at 4:10 PM ^

Can we please stop comparing Beilein to the worst era in Michigan basketball history? Are we going to keep comparing every football coach to the Rich Rod and Hoke years?

I will never forget JB winning us two B1G titles and taking us to a final 4, but those years are statisitical anomaly's and this year is more in line with how his teams usually perform. Is anyone not seriously worried about the future of this program right now?

SDCran

March 7th, 2016 at 4:39 PM ^

Zac hadn't played all summer and wasn't a useful player before 1/1. (But he played which hurt even more). Then we were running Spike out there injured, too.

I'm not an apologist, but I am a realist. I said it the other day, and I'll say it here. This team next year will be like Iowa this year. Ignorant people who only half pay attention will be surprised at the success.

ak47

March 8th, 2016 at 9:26 AM ^

Almost all of the top teams are younger in college basketball these days.  Our two best teams were two of our youngest.  Most great players don't stay 4 years so teams with a lot of 4 year guys generally means those guys are pretty mediocre.  The elite talent moves in and out quickly in most cases and elite talent is what wins championships.