i find this extremely interesting
Latest bracketology has Michigan a 4 seed in Salt Lake City
March 17th, 2013 at 8:23 AM | 
I have weird eyes
I have weird eyes
March 16th, 2013 at 9:35 PM |
Well, sounds about right.
Well, sounds about right.
Well, sounds about right. Struggled a bit down the stretch. Might be good as a rallying call for some of the guys, giving them an underdog mentality. But honestly, I look at the other seeds and I don't see UM getting much better of a positioning.
March 16th, 2013 at 9:36 PM |
Louisville is playing like
Louisville is playing like
Louisville is playing like crap, down 13 to Syracuse. That's not good. We really want them to rally and win.
March 16th, 2013 at 9:52 PM |
Even...
Even...
If we play at a 4, this is not a terrible thing. This team seams to play to their opponent. I wouldn't take a 3/4 seed to differently ( I know ill take flack for that comment ) We have a team that if they "play like a team" they have all the potential in the world. I take it with a grain of salt, enjoy this team, they can surprise any team this year... Go Blue all!
March 16th, 2013 at 9:55 PM |
I don't care if we're a 3 or
I don't care if we're a 3 or
I don't care if we're a 3 or 4. I just want to make sure we're in Auburn Hills.
March 16th, 2013 at 10:08 PM |
Wont be in Auburn Hills as a
Wont be in Auburn Hills as a
Wont be in Auburn Hills as a 4.
March 16th, 2013 at 10:22 PM |
Are you sure? I thought #4
Are you sure? I thought #4
Are you sure? I thought #4 seeds could also get seeded there under the pod system. If not, yikes . . . well, at least Louisville is making a game of it.
March 16th, 2013 at 10:25 PM |
Top 4 seeds CAN get location
Top 4 seeds CAN get location
Top 4 seeds CAN get location preference, but preference goes in order of seed. The way it is shaping it out with who the teams are on the 3/4 lines and where they are located and where the sites are located for rounds one and two, a few four seeds from the east/midwest will probably get sent out west.
March 17th, 2013 at 12:16 AM |
You'd rather get "home court" for a 5 seed match-up
You'd rather get "home court" for a 5 seed match-up
Than play a 6 on a neutral court and avoid getting the 1 seed a round earlier?
"I love him, he's a great coach, he's a great mentor, he's a great friend. He's every single thing you want a college coach to be, and he does it flawlessly." -David Molk
March 17th, 2013 at 12:53 AM |
I would make that trade,
I would make that trade,
I would make that trade, personally. This team needs a confidence boost and a home crowd will help. On a neutral site, who knows how we'll perform?
I want to make the Sweet 16. Anything beyond that is gravy.
March 16th, 2013 at 9:49 PM |
As of right now, 2 teams have
As of right now, 2 teams have
As of right now, 2 teams have pretty much locked in 3 seeds in New Mexico and Florida, IMO. I think MSU will most likely get one and if Cuse wins tonight, they will likely get one. Michigan would need Louisville to win and bump Cuse back down to 4.
March 16th, 2013 at 10:56 PM |
Louisville thankfully
Louisville thankfully
Louisville thankfully performed its civic duty. Amazing turnaround - they were down 16 early in the second half but went on to win by 17.
March 16th, 2013 at 11:06 PM |
Hopefully, the committee will bump Syracuse back to a 4
Hopefully, the committee will bump Syracuse back to a 4
Hopefully, the committee will bump Syracuse back to a 4 for losing to a good team. Seems like predictors have no problem bumping Michigan down when they lose to good teams.
What ya gonna do when HOKEamania runs wild on you???
March 16th, 2013 at 11:08 PM |
They'd better go down. They
They'd better go down. They
They'd better go down. They have nine losses and played in a (somewhat) worse conference.
March 16th, 2013 at 10:41 PM |
So Michigan could play
So Michigan could play
So Michigan could play another MAC team in the first game? Please God no.
"But in the tire fire that was last year's secondary he showed a little spark." - Brian Cook
March 16th, 2013 at 11:09 PM |
Not sure it would matter who they play right now
Not sure it would matter who they play right now
Not sure it would matter who they play right now...just want them in Auburn Hills.
What ya gonna do when HOKEamania runs wild on you???
March 16th, 2013 at 11:13 PM |
Just because we lost to one,
Just because we lost to one,
Just because we lost to one, unusually-good, MAC team last year doesn't mean that they're all like that.
March 17th, 2013 at 12:45 AM |
Bracketology Isn't A Science!
Bracketology Isn't A Science!
And Lunardi isn't a scientist...
Why does Michigan fall to a four seed after losing to Wisky, but Indiana remains a one seed after losing to - wait for it... Wisky. I understand that Michigan has looked mediocre at best in some of their last 12 or so games, but their schedule has been brutal. The Big 10 is by far the best conference, yet Lunardi has New Mexico (who beat UCONN and no one else goodish) ahead of UofM. I think the selection committee will consider their overall body of work to be enough for a three seed at least.
March 17th, 2013 at 1:20 AM |
New Mexico is closer to a 1
New Mexico is closer to a 1
New Mexico is closer to a 1 than a 4
March 17th, 2013 at 10:16 AM |
I don't understand the New
I don't understand the New
I don't understand the New Mexico love. What makes their resume so great? One win over UConn?
EDIT: OK, I see below that the MWC is somehow the highest-RPI conference. But that's absurd.
March 17th, 2013 at 2:15 AM |
Some Things The Committee Considers
Some Things The Committee Considers
I have no idea where teams will be seeded later today, but based on RPI rankings and strength of schedule rankings before games of March 16, but results in games played on March 16:
New Mexico, with the nation’s second ranked RPI, was regular season and conference tournament champ of the conference with the nation’s best RPI (Mountain West). Their strength of schedule is ranked second in the nation. They have a 6-3 record against teams with RPIs in the top 35 and six wins against teams with an RPI above 150. They’re 29-5 and 16-3 in the Mountain West. They’re 9-1 in their last ten games. Their worst loss was to a team with the 78th ranked RPI on the road.
Michigan (RPI: 17; 25-7; 13-7 in the conference with the nation’s second ranked RPI) tied Wisconsin for the fourth best Big Ten regular season record, but was seeded fifth in the conference tournament and has the nation’s 39th ranked strength of schedule. They have a 5-6 record against teams with RPIs in the top 35, ten wins against teams with an RPI above 150 and are 5-5 in their last ten games. Their worst and only bad loss was to the team with the 185th ranked RPI on the road.
Wisconsin (RPI: 34; 23-10; 14-6 in conference, including 2-0 against Michigan) has the nation’s 19th ranked strength of schedule, a 5-7 record against teams with RPIs ranked in the top 35, ten wins against teams with an RPI above 150 and is 7-3 in its last ten games. Their worst and only bad loss was at home to the team with the 130th ranked RPI. They're playing for the Big Ten Tournament Championship.
Indiana (RPI: 5; 27-6; 15-5 in conference) was the regular season conference champ and has the nation’s tenth ranked strength of schedule, an 8-5 record against teams with RPIs ranked in the top 35, ten wins against teams with an RPI above 150 and is 7-3 in its last ten games. Their worst loss was to the team with the 40th ranked RPI on the road.
March 17th, 2013 at 11:50 AM |
Some of that is the natural
Some of that is the natural
Some of that is the natural tendency of the RPI to overrate teams in the best mid-major conferences. From past brackets I think the committee knows that--they talk about RPI and non-conference SOS in public because they're trying to influence scheduling decisions, but behind closed doors they're using it more for organizational purposes (wins against top 50 / top 100 etc.) than to rank the teams of interest themselves. They haven't been handing out one-seeds to MWC and MVC teams just based on RPI, in the past.
Somebody on the committee yesterday talked in an interview about KenPom and Sagarin--I think they use those tools more than they'll admit.
- New Mexico is 22 in Sagarin predictor, 11 in Massey power, 16 at KenPom.
- Michigan is 11 in Sagarin predictor, 13 in Massey power, 11 at KenPom.
- Wisconsin is 8 in Sagarin predictor, 14 in Massey power, 9 at KenPom.
- Indiana is 3 in Sagarin predictor, 4 in Massey power, 3 at KenPom.
If I had to guess I'd say Indiana's a one, Wisconsin and New Mexico are 3's and Michigan's a 4. They'll give the benefit of the doubt to the non-power-conference team, when they have a choice, and to a team that closed strong.
March 17th, 2013 at 1:36 PM |
Lunardi's now has us back in Auburn Hills
Lunardi's now has us back in Auburn Hills
#4 in the West against Bucknell. I'll be happy when 7PM is here and everything is known.
- « first
- ‹ previous
- 1
- 2
- 3
My eye test says we lost most of those 6 to teams projected as a 1,2 or 3 seed. Only one loss was really ugly(MSU) and the other 2 loses were to Wisky who just punked IU. Minus the PSU let down we played against 4 top 20 teams. Any chance New Mexico can say that? Boom Eye Test!!!