5 step program to reach the NCAA Tournament

I have done the same thing with their schedule and different scenarios. Coming off the UConn win, they have some momentum. A quick way to put them right back in the conversation would be to somehow win 2 of the next 3. HUGE game tonight, (in the worst of all places).

how about win 12 Big ten games in two in the BTtourney haha saved u some time there

Walking back to the car from the UConn game, my buddy and I reached a similar conclusion as yourself. Michigan has 13 conference games left to play and need to win 8 of them to have a chance at a bid. Anything less and we're faced with having to make a deep run in the B10 tournament. A tough road to March either way. There is still a chance, but I have a terrible feeling we're going to be looking back and going "what if" on all the bad losses we posted in December and early January.

My plan step by step.
Step 1: Win
Step 2: Win
Step 3: Win
Step 4: Win
Step 5: Stop losing to bad teams

Given how inconsistent this team has played, I think we should just try to take one game at a time. That said, we are certainly going to have our opportunities to play our way into the NCAA tournament with the schedule that we've got coming up.

We should play Wisconsin twice, both without Leuer, so we've got to be able to AT LEAST split with them, right?

Another way to look at it is through the current rpi numbers, from realtimerpi.com (http://www.realtimerpi.com/rpi_188_Men.html)

Michigan's remaining schedule has 7 games (2 with Minnesota and Iowa, one each with Illinois, Penn State, and Northwestern) against teams currently ranked 60 or lower in the rpi and 6 games (2 with MSU and Wisconsin and one each with Purdue and OSU) against top 50 teams.

In my opinion Michigan cannot afford any more bad (outside of the rpi top 100) losses and needs another 3-4 quality (rpi top 50) wins. Remarkably, the Wolverines have a 2-1 record against the rpi top 50 (wins over UConn and OSU, loss at Kansas) despite 3 rpi 100+ losses (BC, at Utah, at Indiana).

If Michigan can win 6-7 of the games against rpi 60+ opponents and go at least 3-3 against the remaining rpi top 50 opponents this would equal, at least, a 12-6 conference record with 5 rpi top 50 wins, and an 18-11 overall regular season record. This would be a fairly similar resume as last year going into the Big Ten Tourney(18-12 regular season, 9-9 conference, 6 rpi top 50 wins).

As was mentioned earlier, the bubble is different year to year, but I think Michigan would have a great case if the above scenario plays out. This would give Michigan a resume that would compare favorably against any other bubble team and a resume that shows improvement through out the year (all bad losses being in the first month of the season, increasing number of quality wins during the final 3 months of the season)

This is a tall order but not unrealistic based on how this season has played out so far. The most difficult part in my opinion is finding 3 wins in the remaining rpi top 50 games. The most likely wins, I think, are against the John Leuer-less Wisconsin Badgers. After that they would still need one win out of: at OSU, at PU, and 2 with MSU, difficult but doable.

GO BLUE!

Profit!

Most sources, ESPN included have 5-6 teams from the BT going. (Yes, it's early, I know.) Today, we're fourth, but Minny and Purdue below us are more widely regarded as likely selections. If you move them up, we drop to sixth, and likely outside looking in.

It's definitely still in our hands right now, but we must play well enough to stay deserving.

I agree Michigan needs to win a bare minimum of eight of its remaining 13 games to even qualify as "on the bubble" and entertain hopes of squeaking in as a 11, 12 or 13 seed.

I think hope dies for good if they lose any of the following: Iowa, at Northwestern, at Iowa, Penn State. If they sweep those four, we have a 14-7 team looking for four wins in the other nine games. I can't find those wins. I expect a sweep by MSU, so we're looking for four wins in seven games. Purdue is having trouble, so maybe that's one. Maybe they get a win or two out of their home games against Wisconsin, Illinois and Minnesota. But I'm having a hard time seeing it.

EDIT: I meant to conclude by saying that the good news is that, if they make it, there's no question in my mind that they'll have earned it. This schedule is rough going the rest of the way.

I'm a big fan of KenPom, and although I realize the statistics only give a rough approximation, I think their predictive value is a lot better than what you see on most sites. He had us at 51% to beat UConn, for example.

Anyway, according to KenPom, our chances of beating Wisky, Purdue and MSU are 8%, 12% and 36% respectively. If you make the somewhat bogus but necessary assumption that the games are independent events, that makes our chances of winning none of these games (.92)*(.88)*(.64)=.52, roughly. So our chances of winning at least one of the three games are 1-.52=.48, or just a hair less than 1/2. Looking at it another way, our expected number of wins is .08 + .12 + .36 = .56, which takes into account that we may win more than one.

That's not as bad as I would have thought. Given our obvious potential to get hot from 3 on any given night, if we can muster the same defensive effort on the road as we have at home (big if), I actually like our chances of taking 1 of 3. If we play to our potential, 2 of 3 is reasonable.

Should be a fun stretch, given the very low expectations (i.e., nothing to lose, so stay loose) for the next two in particular.

Go Blue!

Duplicate post.

I really appreciate the effort and time you put into this, but I'm afraid that 18/19 wins will not be enough. While they may have at the end of the season the same amount of wins this year vs. last year over top 50 RPI opponents they will not have the name recognition. The voters are people and it would have been tough for them to overcome ousting a Michigan team who had beaten DUKE and UCLA. Unfortunately as great a game as UCONN was this weekend, they did not look like a top 20 team at the end of the year, and will not live up to the name recognition of a UCLA and DUKE. My thought is that without a surprise at MSU, we needed 20/21 wins this year and we squandered those away early.

Great post.

I really appreciate the effort and time you put into this, but I'm afraid that 18/19 wins will not be enough. While they may have at the end of the season the same amount of wins this year vs. last year over top 50 RPI opponents they will not have the name recognition. The voters are people and it would have been tough for them to overcome ousting a Michigan team who had beaten DUKE and UCLA. Unfortunately as great a game as UCONN was this weekend, they did not look like a top 20 team at the end of the year, and will not live up to the name recognition of a UCLA and DUKE. My thought is that without a surprise at MSU, we needed 20/21 wins this year and we squandered those away early.

Great post.

I understand that winning the Big 10 tournament is unlikely, but what about a finish that puts us on the bubble after regular season, and then one or two wins in B10 tourney? A quick look at UConn losses look like this:
vs #7 Duke
vs #4 Kentucky
at Cinci
at #12 Georgetown
vs #20 Pitt
at Michigan
So if the boys play like they did against a truly no slouch UConn in our tourney, is it possible we make it in? And I don't mean NIT

I agree with your premise. I wrote over at the JCB on Sunday that 8-5 the rest of the way should put them in position to make the field with anything better than a 1-and-done BTT performance.

That said, I think your closing graph says it all. We just dont know the true shape of the bubble yet. 2-3 weeks more of play will really tell the tale of the state of the Bubble.

But, if Michigan follows through and succeeds at Step One and is on the way to succeeding during Step Two, then when the Bubble begins to crystallize, then Michigan will have a firm place on it.

Thanks for posting.

I know the UCLA and Duke wins last year were our signature wins; but if I recall correctly, UCLA's ranking had dropped a fair bit by the end of the season. It was a signature win at the time, since they were a #4 team, but not as big of a deal by the end of the season.

Does the Tourney Committee tend to judge the value of the win at the time it happens or by its value at the end of the season? If it judges wins at the end of the season, I wouldn't think that the difference between this season and last would be as drastic as people are saying.

Don't blow second half double digit lead to Wisco on road.