You could make an argument for being as high as 9 or 10 - but this is fine. Win these last 2, make at least the semis in the Big Ten tourney, and a 3 seed is guaranteed. A 2 seed may come with more top 10 upsets. Based on the carnage of ranked teams last week, more upsets are coming.
MSU is actually 22, not 18.
That was about what I expected. 12th or 13th.
I'm sure you guys have noted somewhere, but it really stuck out to me vs Minnesota how JB stuck with Spike down the stretch. Spike just makes the right decisions in the heat of the moment. It's nice to see him have that kind of trust from the boss.
In the Beilein uber alles category, I think back to last season. Looking back to some rough stretches within some particular games, it seemed like there were some times where Spike was in the game and was a liability.
But when we got to the tournament, Burke was healthy. The difference between Burke playing 87.5% of the minutes (which he did) and playing more than 90% of the minutes (for which some might have advocated) was possibly instrumental in "saving" some of Burke's energy. Regardless, it was definitely instrumental in getting Spike ready for tough situations. Like, say, playing almost the entire first half of the NC game with great success.
Spike is a heady player who knows his limitations better than most sophomores in the national spotlight. I believe it has been a combination of Spike, JB's confidence in Spike, and JB's (and the other coach's) methodical development of Spike.
And the truly good news: We get two more years of Spike after this one!
Is it just me or has the fact that Virginia is actually really good just kind of come out of nowhere?
Virginia has a couple of nice wins, but they are mostly the product of super-conference unbalanced scheduling. They somehow managed to play Cuse, UNC, Duke, and Pittsburgh all just once. Everyone is screaming 16-1 in the ACC, but that conference is beyond soft after the first 4 teams.
What's funny about this is that Virginia plays exactly the brand of basketball that Wisconsin plays. Horrendously slow, with that pack-line defense, grinding out 47-45 wins (actually Wisconsin beat Virginia 48-38 earlier this season, no surprise there).
75 points against the Syracuse zone D. Just sayin'.
There must be an awful lot of pace and excitement wrapped up in the extra two tenths of a possession that Michigan ekes out over the course of a game. Michigan plays at the 331st fastest pace in the nation, with 65.1 possessions per game. Wisconsin is 335th, at a "horrendously slow" 64.9. Points per game is a worthless stat but probably meaningful to you. Michigan averages less than a basket more per game than Wisconsin, 74.9 to 73.4.
If anything is "funny", it's that Michigan's resurgence coincides with their emphasis on aspects of the game that are benchmarks of Wisconsin's philosophy. They are both in the top 10 in fewest turnovers (UW #1, UM #7), offensive efficiency (UM #4 at 1.15 ppp, UW #10 at 1.13 ppp) and very similar defensively (UW #31 at 63 points per game and UM #46 at 65 points per game).
These teams are nearly identical statistically.
Other than that, your thoughts were dead on.
We must be looking at different sources, but KenPom actually has Wisconsin as the 296th-fastest team at 64.0 possessions per game, and Michigan as the 328th-fastest team at 62.9 possessions per game.
It doesn't change your point, I just thought it was interesting. We have become that which we hate.
I'm aware that Michigan plays at a rather slow tempo. You ask anyone who plays a more exciting brand of basketball, Michigan or Wisconsin, and the answer will most likely not be the team coached the leader of the Bug People of Rigel. I should have clarified that a lot of what makes teams feel so damn slow has to do with what you actually do during those 35 seconds. I don't think there is a lot of similarity between Bo Ryan's and John Beilein's offensive sets. I could be wrong, but you'd have to ask Ace and Dylan Burkhardt, etc.
In fairness to Badger that was not your point. Regardless, how "exciting" they are or are not is a subjective statement, and you are likely to get different answers from different fans.
watching Michigan plays on the court is a lot more aesthetically pleasing than watching Wisconsin trying to grind it out with defense. Michigan offense is more free flowing with open shots which gives that perceptions to some people that Michigan runs "fast".
Virginia has a couple of nice wins, but they are mostly the product of super-conference unbalanced scheduling.
So, so, so false. Try this: Let Syracuse and Duke replace their losses to each other with a win against a scrub. Nope, still can't catch up to UVA. Let's say Duke beats UNC at home, since they lost to the Heels on the road. Let both Duke and UNC replace their losses to each other with a win against a scrub. Nope, still can't catch up to UVA.
That soft conference left Cuse with a home loss to BC and Duke with losses to Clemson and ND. And it left UNC with losses to Wake and Miami. UVA got through to 16-1 because it's 3-1 against the other teams anyone takes seriously and 3-0 against bubble teams Clemson and FSU.
Virginia won't get to the second weekend.
Guarantee they do.
Huh? UVA is going to get a #2 seed, so you're THAT confident they will lose to a #7 seed? Look I'm not saying UVA is the greatest team ever, but I would say they at least have a really good chance of making the sweet 16. I don't think they will make the Final Four but missing the second weekend would be surprising.
This is exactly my point. Do I think Virginia is terrible? No, but they really have just a couple of good wins, and their best road win is Pittsburgh, who is hovering on the 8 to 10 line for the NCAA Tournament. If you put Virginia in the Big Ten I bet their conference record looks something like 11-7.
I wouldn't expect you to, but you and Only Blue don't really know the story of the season and are bringing stereotypes to the table. I'd at least expect to see the right stats: UVA's total strength of schedule is 26th and non-conference SOS is 25th.
UVA ain't gonna be a 1 seed, but I repeat my guarantee they make the Sweet 16.
Guarantee? That's a daring proposition in one-and-done tournaments
Even if they don't make the Sweet 16, it doesn't invalidate anything you're saying. I checked out your blog, so I will defer to you on Virginia basketball, for sure. I guess I just need to see teams win games away from home to convince myself that they are good. That standard is very subjective and probably not fair, I might add. To me, their style of play just seems to indicate that they would be ripe for an upset by a 6 seed, but I guess #30 Kenpom offense isn't too bad to go along with a Top 5 defense.
I do appreciate your open mind. I ought to admit: taken in a vacuum, which the committee will do for the most part, there are holes in the resume, and going 4-4 against the RPI 50 is certainly one. You talk to a fair number of UVA fans and they'll tell you they can't understand why UVA isn't in the running for a #1 seed. Ain't happening. If they win the ACC tournament - or maybe lose on Sunday - I think they're a 2 seed. Not hard to see how a loss to UWGB and a blowout loss to Tennessee could sour people. There's no way I can be taken as a fully objective source - I just think it's important to know things like the transformation that happened following the Tennessee game in order to get the full story.
In terms of seeding, I agree. Michigan and Virginia are in almost identical situations. Solidly on the 3 line (only a loss @Ilinois/Indiana, @Maryland could probably drop them to a 4), with an extended conference tournament run potentially pushing either to a 2 seed. 3 seed is overwhelmingly likely for both.
http://espn.go.com/mens-college-basketball/rpi
| Virginia SOS | Michigan SOS |
| Overall: 26 | Overall: 9 |
| Non-conf: 25 | Non-conf: 95 |
| Conference: 83 | Conference: 4 |
Whose is #2 in KenPom? Virginia. Do you think Pomeroy's ranking algorithm agrees with your "mostly a product of super-conference unbalanced scheduling" assertion?
From Gasaways Insider article on UVA: "The schedule Virginia has played in the ACC has been slightly more challenging statistically than what Florida has faced in the SEC and, obviously, day-and-night tougher than what Wichita State had to confront in the Missouri Valley. No one (quite rightly) is questioning the Gators or Shockers."
Tempo adjusted average margin of victory in ACC play: 23 pts
If you don't pay attention to Virginia then it probably seems like they came out of nowhere, especially since they stumbled early in the year on the offensive side of the ball and have a couple black-eye type losses (@Tennessee, Wisco, @Wisc-GB). But Tony Bennett has been quietly building a good squad that past couple of years, and this year it took a month of adjustments before they got up to potential. Following the Tennessee loss this season, they made some adjustments on offense and have been handling everyone since.
If you watch them play it's a confident team, fully bought into their style. They force a half-court game which favors them, but like Michigan, their half-court offesnse isn't boring to watch - they methodically prod and always take good shots, rebound well and don't turn the ball over. They are play like a machine that executes it's prime directive with extreme effciency and rately get knocked off their game.
I don't love slow-tempo basketball either, but if it gets results I'm all for it.
And many are questioning the Gators, though far fewer than are questioning Wichita State. I'd wager a fair number of those questioning the Gators have vivid memories of their vivisection by Michigan in the Elite 8, and know full well how terrible the SEC is at the basketballs.
They stayed competitve with a NBA caliber team in Michigan State (before the injuries decimated them to only a NCAA #1 seed type team)??
Duke and Kansas seem overinflated as well.
Seems appropriate. Win the next 2 and the quarterfinals of the BTT and I think we have a decent shot at a 2 seed (with a 3 seed a lock I would think?).
Waiting for Pollstalker to provide the comprehensive distribution as not all of the individual ballots are available for viewing yet, but here are a few of the national votes, if anyone is interested -
- Dick Vitale put us at #12
- John Feinstein had us at #10
- Seth Davis went with #13 for Michigan
really do not matter, where's the Matta? What's the Matta?
Dang it, I had #11 in the pool.
Not to say we have it easy this week, but another week of other ranked teams beating up on each other will allow us to move up, if we handle business.
I believe it's being brought to you by the numbers 5, 9, 14, 24 and 26.
That is all that is showing. Kentucky is 24.
complaining MSU should be ranked higher due to injuries. /s
But but but appling's wrist....
That pic is hilarious! Love the look on the assistant coach's face. The little kid in the background is good too. In fact the crowd reaction is pretty good all the way around.
Izzo is finally getting exposed. I do agree that he runs a clean program so I will give him props for that. However, he is certainly exposed for his coaching ability. Why would a coach stick with Appling when he obviously is not performing.
The RCMB is blowing up because we are better than msu is. They are starting to blame Izzo for msu's woes. Some are even calling for him to leave. The msu fanbase is in a free-fall. They think that msu should win the B1G Title every year.
They both have great leaping ability and Elmo's face is almost as red as Tom's.
No, the coaches poll just hasn't been updated yet.
They were 16 last week.