Saturday's Rooting Guide
Morning all. Holy hell, was that a day of college basketball. The morning session was not kind to Michigan but overall, the games we needed to go our way were an even split at 5-5. It's left us still in on most brackets but in a....challenging place with 2 days to go. Let's look at Michigan first:
- Michigan stayed the same in the NET ranking, we're still at 34.
- As of the last update on Brack Matrix, we're in 133 of 142 brackets
- We're 6 teams above the cut line (4 of them are done playing, that's good news)
- Indiana jumped us on Torvik, we're 26 over there. He has us as the 8th team from the cut line
Per the suggestion of Kevin14, I'm going to put the games in TIME order today, because, frankly, they're all of basically equal importance. And the good news is, the list is MUCH shorter today:
- (1pm EST on ESPN) BIG game here, probably the most important game of the day to be honest. We need Arkansas to beat Texas A&M. With a loss here, Texas A&M should be out. Their NET ranking is 51 today and they only have 3 Quad 1 wins and 2 Quad 3 losses. Need this win by Arkansas badly.
- (1pm on CBS Sports Network) Thank you for the win over the Bonnies yesterday, St. Louis but we need Davidson to beat St. Louis today. We're trying to keep the A-10 at a one-big league (or two at worst with Dayton). We need St. Louis not to steal a bid.
- (3pm on ESPN2) This one isn't a huge deal today but better to deal with it now. Houston is in the tournament regardless, but we need someone to knock out Tulane, so they aren't a bid stealer. We're rooting for Houston in this one.
- (3:30pm on CBS) There are not words for how much I hate typing this but....Michigan State is 3 spots away on the NET rankings from being a Quad 1 home win. So, please lose Purdue I guess?
- (3:30pm on CBS Sports Network) Big one here. Richmond probably gave us one of the biggest wins yesterday, knocking off a surging VCU team. They are quite a way down the NET rankings still (85) and Dayton is just on the edge of the field. We essentially need Richmond to win today and lose to Davidson tomorrow. Richmond losing here wouldn't be terrible because it isn't a big stealer but it likely pushes Dayton into the tourney field, which may be inevitable at this point. UMass really did us dirty yesterday....
- (5pm on ESPN2) Memphis is solidly in the field but SMU is right on the cut line. With the win today, SMU likely jumps us. SMU's NET ranking jumped an insane 6 spots, to 42 today. We need Memphis to win today.
- (6pm on CBS) This one isn't a huge deal, as both teams are in the tourney field but San Diego State beating Boise State just makes our win over SDSU look even better. That's now a solid Q-1 win but saying we beat a Conference Champion can only help
- (8:30pm on ESPN) Thanks for nothing, North Carolina.....Virginia Tech is now 30 on the NET rankings. They're in the ACC final against Duke. I'm concerned that Virginia Tech is in regardless but a big loss to Duke may help us a bit. We need Duke to win this one
So there you have it. Me personally, I think the Texas A&M, SMU, Dayton, and Virginia Tech are the biggest ones today and for Quad wins, the Purdue/MSU game is important.
Gonna be close fellas/ladies. We need some help today. Go Blue!
Great work again! Thanks very much.
Thanks again TB9!
Here is some info on Michigan-hating Jerry Palm:
Jerry Palm went to Purdue in the 1980s. He lives near South Bend, and he used to cover Notre Dame football. His bias against Michigan in his rankings has long been evident - and now I understand why.
Further evidence:
He tweeted: “Bring back Phil Martelli!” on Thursday, March 10 at 1:21pm, moments after our heartbreaking collapse against Indiana.
That sounds like a hater, not an objective bracketologist.
I am sure it gets old losing to the winningest team in college football history. Your alma mater and your favorite home team must be weary of repetitive beatings by Michigan. Better luck in the next Notre Dame game in 2033. And - in the meantime, stay professional my friend!
I'd also add that Palm just isn't that good at his job anymore - he's ranked 100 out of 135 in the BracketMatrix rankings and arguably he's gotten worse as the years have gone on. Joe Lunardi, no great shakes himself, is ranked 55th. So it's sort of crazy that he's pushed out there as some expert in selecting brackets when he's just not.
Sometimes emotion can hinder performance- especially when objectivity is the number one key to success in your field. Jerry might do better writing for a sports blog.
Is he any better at writing than picking brackets?
March 12th, 2022 at 10:15 PM ^
Even just, using an arbitrary rule like the "4 games over .500" piece when Michigan had a Q4 game canceled and had 3 Q4 games total. Like I'll happily agree Michigan has one of the weirder bubble resumes in recent memory but like- arbitrary rules are a dumb reason to keep them out.
Unrelated but MSU was 64th in Kenpom last year, we're currently 33rd
March 12th, 2022 at 11:28 AM ^
As a Purdue grad, he was probably rooting for us against IU so he was probably also frustrated by that collapse
March 12th, 2022 at 11:34 AM ^
CBS Sports might be better off by using Stephen Colbert, Gayle King or the reporters from 60 Minutes instead of Jerry "Face" Palm to handle their bracketology.
Nope, sorry, don't care how much it helps us but I'm not cheering for Duke or MSU to win.
I can respect that and I actually noticed I made a mistake anyway. Michigan State is 36 in the NET, so we'd need them to move up 6 spots. So feel free to root for Purdue lol
I hear you on Duke. I guess root for Va Tech to lose? :)
March 12th, 2022 at 10:07 AM ^
MSU and Purdue are both getting in the Tourney so I don't see how either one of them losing helps Michigan. With that being the case.......Boiler Up!
March 12th, 2022 at 12:07 PM ^
MSU winning potentially gives Michigan an additional Q1 win, giving Michigan a stronger case/resume.
Things can happen to help Michigan that don’t directly involve another bubble team losing.
March 12th, 2022 at 11:09 AM ^
Would you cheer for MSU if they needed to win against someone else to put Michigan into the Big Ten championship game in football?
March 12th, 2022 at 12:34 PM ^
Cheer is too strong of a word. I might temporarily hedge my hate.
Hell I'd root for MSU to beat OSU in football just because.
I'm rooting for Purdue even if it means nit
Ill add Hockey Michigan Notre Dame - Big ten tourney semifinal -630 BTN
Thanks again! I was F5 this morning like it's football season and the Upon Further Review is expected to drop
Seems that Michigan is in ok shape; NCAA tournament is more likely than not unfortunately the Dayton first four may be the final spot?
I really like Buzz & the Aggies, and Quentin is a fantastic player. I’d like to see them get in plus our money went there with one son.
Good stuff.
I do think some of the recent jostling is a bit related to creating drama and not necessarily indicative of actual changes in the tourney planning. Like, Lunardi had UM safely in yesterday and ND, WF, and Xavier in more precarious positions and now UM has slipped while those teams have all risen/stayed pay despite all of them having already lost and with weaker resumes. And it's not like IU lost yesterday - they took down Illinois (which makes UM's resume a bit stronger).
Also, I went and looked back at the last 4 11-seed play-in game matchups and their average KenPom ranking (I can't find old NET scores) is in the high 50's (56.1 to be precise). And even that's misleading because in 2017 the #30 and #29 teams in KenPom (KSU and WF) played each other in an 11-game matchup. Other than that one matchup we're mostly seeing teams in the 50s and 60s play in those games, and maybe that happens again this year but that seems like the worst-case scenario.
March 12th, 2022 at 10:06 AM ^
It’s the manner of loss, in my opinion. Think about the last 12 minutes on Thursday. That is the committees lasting impression. A game in which Michigan trailed the entire way by 4-6 points would have been highly preferable. A loss would have probably been fine, the basketball equivalent of the Challenger Disaster was not fine. It wasn’t so much that we lost, it was that everybody in the nation was asking each other “did you see that Michigan shit earlier?” Essentially the only way Michigan wasn’t getting in was to have exactly what happened happen. Hated the Indiana draw. Hated it from the moment it was settled. A desperate team also seeking revenge again us specifically.
March 12th, 2022 at 10:29 AM ^
I think you’re making this more of a big deal than it really is. Teams come back from large deficits all the time. Just in the Big10 tourney Northwestern came back from 15 down to win and MSU blew a 20 point lead in the last 13 min and was lucky to win. It happens, it sucks, but nationally, no one cares. They just see the L.
March 12th, 2022 at 10:35 AM ^
I don’t think I am making a bigger deal of it than it was, but reasonably minds can disagree. There is a reason Michigan is falling while other teams that lost and are home watching are staying the same. When disaster strikes your team, there is a strong urge to rationalize why it wasn’t a disaster. But make no mistake - a disaster it was.
March 12th, 2022 at 10:38 AM ^
I think you're overthinking this a bit. The committee isn't going to remember the contours of one game 4 days ago. UM is on the edge because they went 17-14 and lost to IU, not because they blew a big lead. OSU blew a huge lead to PSU and I doubt that'll affect their seeding.
March 12th, 2022 at 10:42 AM ^
Seeding and the bubbles edge are far different things. It is possible that I am overstating the impact of the meltdown-ish quality of the loss Thursday. But is was far from our first meltdown, and those things add up.
March 12th, 2022 at 11:45 AM ^
The nature of how a team lost or the date on which that loss occurred appear no where on the team sheet that the selection committee uses. The committee considers each game roughly equivalent across every Quad. All they will see from the loss to IU is that one team close to the bubble lost to another team close to the bubble. They will see a team ranked 38th in NET beating a team ranked 34th in NET.
March 12th, 2022 at 12:31 PM ^
We just disagree. You are treating the committee as they are a collective robot. Impressions and “vibes” do play into their decisions. I am in no way advocating for Michigan to be out, I am desperate for them to make the field. I do think that the manner in which they lost matters though, and doesn’t bode well.
The selection committee for the NCAA tournament has, historically, done a very good job of putting teams in the field who have resumes deserving of a spot. They have been consistent and thorough in their process of evaluating at-large-teams. If that’s treating them as a “collective robot” then so be it.
The manner in which teams lose matters in so far as it affects their metrics. Michigan’s loss to IU may have come after an epic collapse, but the committee just sees a 5 point loss.
Sure, but I also think you're portraying the committee as a bunch of people who pay a ton of attention to specific games and remember how they played out, which isn't the case. Of so, Providence being rocked by Creighton and being one spot above UM in NRT rating would mean they'd be sweating a bid as well, and yet they seem firmly in Sweet 16 seeding.
March 12th, 2022 at 10:28 AM ^
It’s a prediction of the committee. If lunardi is heating that Michigans overall record is a problem he’s going to move it based on that
March 12th, 2022 at 10:40 AM ^
If Lunardi is some front man for the committee, why is he worse than 54 other people - many of whom are randos online - at his job?
This is literally a nonsense argument.
Lunardi gets seeds wrong, he generally gets the teams right
March 12th, 2022 at 10:42 AM ^
But it was the same record for 2 days when UM didn't move a bit. I have a hard time believing the committee decided to look back again at a team from 2 days earlier that hasn't changed. And then why move up Xavier, who lost to a sub-.500 team in their conference tourney and finished the year losing 6 of 7?
March 12th, 2022 at 11:38 AM ^
There are minor changes that happen to the quadrant records as teams shift up or down. So even if you're "in the clubhouse" your scorecard can change.
I think with Xavier, people perhaps overreacted to their loss to Butler / their recent slide and once things settled and they were able to evaluate their overall body of work, which is very comparable to Michigan's. They have two fewer q1 losses, one more q2 win but one more q3 loss so probably a slightly better resume.
They do have far worse metrics, so that would hopefully tip the scales to Michigan.
Thanks TB9. This helps to keep my interest and my hopes up even after the debacle on Thursday.
Really interesting chart put together by Scott Bell over on Twitter. Of the 15 Bubble Teams, Michigan has the best SOS, 2nd best Q-1 wins & NET ranking, and 3rd best Torvik ranking.
Outside of total wins, our metrics are very, very good if you look at it through this lens. Scott think 8 teams out of this group of 15 make it. To me, Oklahoma, BYU, VCU, and Wake are out. Looking at it this way, I'm not sure how Rutgers is in. Same with Miami. Thoughts?
March 12th, 2022 at 10:11 AM ^
Honestly, from the few comments the committee chair has made - they seem to be, as usual, going by the adage: who did you play (SOS), who did you beat (Q1+2 wins), where did you beat them (road record).
Which would be really good news for Michigan despite the meh overall record.
March 12th, 2022 at 10:30 AM ^
Because it’s good for Michigan people here have really focused on number of quad 1 wins and not overall record in quad 1 and 2 games. Yes Michigan has a lot of quad one wins but it’s no guarantee it will be viewed better than a team that has less wins but a better record in those games. Is going 8-13 in quad 1 &2 better than going 6-3 in those games?
March 12th, 2022 at 10:39 AM ^
That's a fair point.
(and I don't mean this as a dig) It would seem you don't think we're in OR you think we're like the last team in. Is that a fair assumption?
March 12th, 2022 at 10:51 AM ^
For reference here are the Q1+Q2 records (Q1 only) for other bubble teams.
Based on what you’re saying, you think SMU, Wyoming, and Dayton are getting in over any of these other teams.
Outside of that, maybe Notre Dame should be more concerned?
Michigan - 8-13 (5-10)
VT - 8-10 (2-5)
Indiana - 8-11(4-7)
Oklahoma - 10-14 (4-12)
Xavier - 8-11 (5-8)
SMU - 6-5 (2-1)
Wake - 5-7 (1-4)
Wyoming - 11-6 (4-5)
ND - 4-9 (2-7)
Dayton - 8-5 (3-2)
March 12th, 2022 at 11:07 AM ^
UM is going to be sweating out Sunday but it feels like a lot of the people who are claiming UM is out are mostly just basing that on vibes because when you actually put their resume against others they look as good/better than a lot of teams people assume are locks.
March 12th, 2022 at 10:59 AM ^
Not answering for him, but IMO, if SMU and A&M lose today I think we will be the last team in the field. Either of those teams win, particularly if Vtech beats Duke, I don’t see a path. I think Dayton is in. As of this moment, I don’t see a scenario where we are not in the First Four games.
I think we are in the play in games and if enough goes wrong out of the tournament. I’d say its more likely we miss the tournament than avoid Dayton at this point
I'll buy this ak, however, that's when SOS kicks in.
March 12th, 2022 at 10:55 AM ^
Thanks for the stat sheet TB9. Agreed on this favoring Michigan. Today's games will be interesting. I rather have Purdue win vs MSU. The BTT has been wild enough. Maybe IU winning again will help Michigan's cause as well. (better SOS)
March 12th, 2022 at 11:48 AM ^
Don't know why he'd put Torvik on here considering it's not on the teamsheets or used by the committee. Q1 wins is kind of useless without taking into account win percentage.
Rutgers has a very good argument here because they have not only the most q1 wins, but they're 500 in q1, a better q1 win percentage than most of these teams and on high volume. Torvik is again irrelevant, and NET and Kenpom are just two of several metrics. Rutgers has a good chance.
The odds each team here has is more or less proportional to the number of matrix brackets they're on. That's really the best way to aggregate all the info.
It would be the shock of the century if Michigan were left off, even if some of these teams win today.
I agree 100% TB9.
I think Indiana, VA Tech and A&M dramatically improved their chances with strong tournament runs against good competition. Other than that, it's mostly noise unless some upstarts turn one-bid leagues into two.
Most "experts" agree Michigan earned a tournament berth - some debate as to whether they avoid Dayton.
As for the nature of their loss, there have been a whole bunch of huge comebacks in tournaments all around the country. IMO beating OSU on the road is way more impactful than losing to Indy in the BTT.
Guess we'll all find out tomorrow.
March 12th, 2022 at 10:05 AM ^
It’s a weird season at 17-14, but with a really good SOS and NET. Linardi has us watching games today. A few go the wrong way and we’re out.
Also, 9 Big Ten teams is a lot, I don’t like being that 9th one, hopefully the committee sees Rutgers as the 9th one.
March 12th, 2022 at 11:29 AM ^
Rutgers might be the only Big Ten team that’ll be sweating out Selection Sunday. Other than their one-game advantage over Michigan in the overall record and their 6-6 Quad 1 record compared to Michigan's 5-10 Quad 1 results, Rutgers doesn't compare very favorably to Michigan.
It's not like the season stopped after Rutgers ran off four straight wins in the first half of February over ranked Big Ten teams. They're 2-4 since then and barely escaped with a one-point home-court win over Penn State last Sunday.
Despite Joe Lunardi's prediction that Rutgers will get one of the last four byes because they’re 18-13 with six Quad 1 wins and they beat every one of the other top nine Big Ten teams, they also lost four against the Big Ten's bottom five. Those four losses plus their loss to Iowa in their first Big Ten Tournament game, three very bad out-of-conference losses in November by a total of seven points and their low NET ranking (78 after their loss to Iowa) may drop the Scarlet Knights to the NIT.
I agree Michigan's resume looks much stronger than Rutgers - especially that #3 SOS.
That said, IMO one way I think the NCAA selection process is flawed is rating bad losses as highly as good wins. The goal is to determine which teams stand the best chance of winning in the tournament - who cares if they're also capable of losing?
Rutgers (and Michigan for that matter) has proven they can beat top teams. Therefore, it's clear both teams are capable of beating pretty much anyone in the tournament.
A team that has few good wins - even without "bad" losses - hasn't really proven anything. If all their games are against mediocre competition, it proves only they're capable of beating mediocre teams.
That's what auto-bids are for - to allow schools that haven't played anyone a chance to prove themselves. IMO, at-large bids should be for teams that have proven they can beat top teams.