March 16th, 2013 at 5:31 PM ^

They Big10 will not get 3 2 seeds.  Wiscy maxes out at a 3.  10 loss teams don't get 2 seeds.  That just doesn't happen.  Also people tend to overrate conference tournament results.  The committee factors them in like regular games, no more no less.

UM Indy

March 16th, 2013 at 5:18 PM ^

Anyone explain to me why Iowa isn't even getting mentioned as a tourney team? They went 9-9 in the toughest conference in the country. Rarely, if ever, do Big Ten teams that go .500 in conference get left out.


March 16th, 2013 at 5:19 PM ^

Because they played about the easiest possible conference schedule, playing a bunch of contenders only once apiece.  They have little in the way of signature wins.



March 16th, 2013 at 5:26 PM ^

Minnesota played a much tougher overall schedule and has a lot more impressive wins.  They've played poorly for several weeks now, but their schedule should still get them in.  

A Lot of Milk

March 16th, 2013 at 5:30 PM ^

Stop worrying about the seed or the location. Those two things SHOULD NOT have an effect on the team's performance. Beilein needs to teach these kids how to play in a hostile environment. Tune it all out, play like you've been coached, and just win, baby, win.


March 16th, 2013 at 6:07 PM ^

I'm not sure it's something that can be taught.  It's hard to explain to someone what it's like to play in a crazy environment where 13,000 cheer against you.  It's hard for almost any team to play on the road and especially so for young teams.  Still, we went 4-5 in true road games, with one of the losses being the Wisconsin miracle.



March 16th, 2013 at 6:08 PM ^

It's not just Michigan. Every team benefits from playing closer to home and in front of more of their fans. Less distance to travel, no time changes to mess up routines, and it's far easier to communicate on the court in front of your own fans. Also, there is probably some psychological aspects as well. The effects of these factors are most likely magnified by playing so many freshman in Michigan's case, but I'm sure every team in the country would rather play in a more familiar setting.


March 16th, 2013 at 5:31 PM ^

If Georgetown get a better seed than Michigan I will be seriously pissed. I think it's going to be a 3, the 2 seed will go to whoever wins between MSU and OSU.

A Lot of Milk

March 16th, 2013 at 5:40 PM ^

Serious question: if it's been proven that we can't defend, why don't we just go all in on offense? If we crash the offensive boards and stop worrying as much about getting back, maybe we can just our score teams. Obviously there are a couple problems with this, but why not try it? I know no one on here wants to win games 103-97, but does it matter how we win anymore? Granted, it probably would've been a better idea to try this for a half against Penn St, rather than in a serious tournament for the first time. Hell, this suggestion is probably more suited towards a game of NBA 2k13 than in real life, but it was just a thought I was having. The whole year I've heard about how efficient the offense is, well why don't we prove it? This is obviously just a crazy idea, but I thought it was worth a share. GO BLUE!


March 16th, 2013 at 5:45 PM ^

Get a high seed and make the Final Four. Next year. Hockey is on tonight. This is not the time of year to regress and expect great things. Reality.


March 16th, 2013 at 6:32 PM ^

Could be worse. SLC's a great place to visit in the wintertime.

(Not that I have any great faith in Lunardi's prognosticating.)


March 16th, 2013 at 7:20 PM ^

Not sure but I am sure all the sparty fans and other 6 teams fan base will be rooting against us.I do hope we go to AH because of all the UM fans who want to go.

Ty Butterfield

March 16th, 2013 at 7:46 PM ^

How does Indiana still get a one seed after losing today? If conference tournament games are only going to affect seeding for some teams then what is the point?


March 16th, 2013 at 8:48 PM ^

I can't really argue that Michigan is playing like a deserving 2-3 seed but I also don't understand how Michigan's seeding seems to take a hit after every loss even if the loss is to a good team.  Michigan was considered by most "experts" a probably 2-seed before losing by a point to Indiana.  The loss bumped the prediction to a 3-seed.  The loss to Wisconsin bumps the prediction to a 4-seed.  Indiana loses to Ohio St. at home (slightly worse loss than losing to Indiana at home) and remains a 1-seed.  Indiana loses to the same Wisconsin team a day later and remains a likely 1-seed.  I do not understand why one team gets hammered and the other it doesn't seem to have any effect.  It's not like those 2 losses were Indiana's only losses.  They stand at 27-6.  It's not much different than 26-7.  I am not trying to say Michigan deserves a higher seed than Indiana but if you look at the whole schedule and all the wins and losses why do relatively similar losses cost one team and not the other?


March 16th, 2013 at 8:21 PM ^

I think his point was, that we are bad enough defensively that we give up a lot of points in the half court game.  So what's the difference if we give up transition baskets or half court baskets?  At least if we are giving up transition baskets by crashing the offensive boards, we are increasing our chances of offensive baskets.

Not to say I necessarily agree with this approach, but I think he's willing to accede that this will give up transition baskets, and that it is an acceptable tradeoff.

This was supposed to be a response to a post above.  Trust me, it makes more sense in context.


March 16th, 2013 at 8:59 PM ^

I understand his point completely. But I disagree.  We're not great at halfcourt defense, but we're not so bad that scoring in the halfcourt against us is as easy as scoring in transition.  I also don't think we'd grab that many offensive rebounds even if we tried to crash like crazy.  We just don't have that many big, physical guys that can win the battles for inside position.  

If we tried to mimic MSU and send 3-4 guys to the boards every possession, we'd get some extra points, but we'd definitely get burned the other way a lot, too.  Guys like Stauskas, THJ, LeVert, Burke et al. just aren't going to get us a ton of offensive boards.  It's not their game.  

At this point in the season, we are what we are.  There is no magic coaching adjustment that's going to make a huge difference.  We just have to hope a combination of extra effort,  mistake-free basketball and good shooting can work.




March 16th, 2013 at 8:51 PM ^

Why does everyone think they will be so far ahead of us in the seeding ( a 2 for them and a 4 for us). They finished by losing 4 of their last 5 games vs ranked teams, including UM. In the BTT they went 1-1. I think the resumes are fairly similar.


March 16th, 2013 at 9:22 PM ^

that we beat Indiana but because of the no call on the flagrant, we lose.  Sparty beats Iowa because of a bad call too.  The shot where Iowa CLEARLY had all ball but was called a foul.  If that does not get called, Iowa gets the ball and wins.  

So yes, they are not better than us.


March 16th, 2013 at 9:16 PM ^

After breaking my glasses with the maize-and-blue-colored lenses, I saw that:

Michigan’s RPI has slipped to 17. They are 6-6 in their last 12 games with two of those wins and one of those losses coming against Penn State RPI: 185); although two of the other Michigan wins were against teams that could be seeded no worse than two in their respective regions (Michigan State and Ohio State), those wins were at home by a total of three points.

Then there’s the "eye test" taken with clear lenses.  Michigan has become a two player team on offense, a porous team on defense and a weak rebounding team. If Burke or Hardaway goes cold, Michigan’s offense often has no scoring threat. As great a job as John Beilein has done in recruiting talented players, he appears to have trouble making in-game adjustments, and he has no assistant who apparently can coach defensive skills and strategy.

Michigan just as easily could be a five seed as a three seed. And wherever Michigan is seeded or wherever Michigan plays its first game, as sad as it will seem, it may become a popular "filling-out-the-bracket" pick for Michigan to lose that game.

Nevertheless, regardless of the seed and region placement (and I’d be rooting for both Michigan and Michigan State to wind up on the same line in different regions, and playing on alternate nights in Auburn Hills), I’m hoping that by Michigan’s next game, the starting frontcourt will be McGary, Morgan and Robinson, with Horford rotating in for McGary and Morgan, and Bielfeldt getting a few minutes to help the others avoid serious foul trouble; that Stauskas and Robinson can alternate at the small forward and each be rejuvenated by that arrangement; that LeVert and Albrecht (and maybe even Vogrich, the only senior who possibly could see playing time) can make some positive contributions; and that Michigan can find some Silver Linings Playbook juju that will take them further than most of the "experts" predict. . . . And if they're looking for some inspiration, how about getting Austin Hatch to give the pre-game speech? 


March 16th, 2013 at 9:38 PM ^

FYI: They cannot play on alternate nights.  There's a Thursday day session of two games (say the 3v14 and 6v11 of Region A) and a Thursday night session of two games (say 4v13 and 5v12 of Region B).  Then on Saturday the winners of a session play each other back to back, which is why Saturday's ticket, if M and MSU are in Auburn Hills, will be quite the ticket to hold.


March 16th, 2013 at 11:28 PM ^

The more appropriate wish would've been for U-M and MSU playing in alternate sessions on the same day.  So, MSU can get a three seed and U-M can get a four or a five seed in order to play at alternate times. (With Syracuse's epic meltdown against Louisville tonight, that four seed might be looking a little safer for the Wolverines.)