|05/03/2013 - 10:57am||I'd like to see some major||
I'd like to see some major bowls in Big Ten land- it seems unfair to me that all the other major conferences get the premier bowls.
If you switch allignment for conferences in bowls some bowls that are currently ehh-bowls could become more enticing (kind of how it seems the Pinstripes bowl will become a bigger deal). It gets tiring seeing the top Big Ten teams play PAC 12 teams in CA and SEC and ACC teams in FL....
|05/02/2013 - 2:53pm||Wow that is really cool||
Wow that is really cool
|05/02/2013 - 2:36pm||If there's a chance for money||
If there's a chance for money it will be taken by any school- so it is pretty hard to imagine it being settled...
|04/24/2013 - 1:31pm||This is why I love this site!||
This is why I love this site! Gerat work!
|04/24/2013 - 9:14am||What an amazing thing to do-||
What an amazing thing to do- puts things into perspective about what is really important and how to truly make a difference.
If anyone is interested in how to donate or is curious to know more about what Cameron Lyle will be doing medically here's the place to look.
|04/18/2013 - 3:56pm||True- its on the front page-||
True- its on the front page- but that post has lots of info on it- and the board discusses topics more.
Plus, I don't mind discussing how all our recruits are top-150 for a second time!
|04/17/2013 - 2:49pm||I agree they are called too||
I agree they are called too quickly.
I also think jump balls should always go to the defense- rewarding a godo defensive posession. I also think it would make the ends of games more exciting. If you need a comeback and you get a jumpball on defense its rewarded- and your team has a better chance of gettign a comeback based on tough defensive play.
|04/03/2013 - 12:48pm||I'm happy if he plays to the||
I'm happy if he plays to the level of any of those players!
How crazy would it be if he is Big Ten freshamn of the year- two in a row from the same Indiana HS and neither playing for Indiana... let's hope he can do it!
|04/03/2013 - 12:46pm||I believe baller should be||
I believe baller should be underlined at minimum 5 times to really emphasize your point..
|04/01/2013 - 9:26am||Nov 21- neutral site-||
Nov 21- neutral site- Michigan- L 67-62
Feb 2- home- Syracuse- W 65-55
Mar 14- neutral site- Syracuse- L 62-59
Mar 21- neutral site- Wichita St- L 73-55
|03/31/2013 - 5:46pm||I believe UConn's last||
I believe UConn's last championship team was 8-8 in big east play but undefeated in non- conference play- which supports your claim. But they did win the big east tourney as well...
|03/26/2013 - 6:32pm||I just looked up their||
I just looked up their bracket and they beat Kansas in the sweet 16 85-82 then UNC in the final four 66-58 before Kentucky in the title 84-79. Let's hope we don't have to beat three one seeds but it's kinda neat that if we do Kansas will be the sweet sixteen loser in both examples.
|03/26/2013 - 6:27pm||I believe the Arizona||
I believe the Arizona championship team is the only team to do so
|03/15/2013 - 12:08pm||It sounds exactly like||
It sounds exactly like something he would say...
I am looking forward to hopefully playing them in BTT and also next year- with many of their players graduating/going to NBA I think we have a great chance against them next year!
|03/15/2013 - 11:25am||Curious where you heard that-||
Curious where you heard that- it sounds very believable though.
Also I am not sure why he is so into it being "his program."
The stuff with Meyer happened before he was ever associated with Indiana (and he wasn't involved...) and I get coaches have ego's- but Indiana's program is much bigger than him- what makes him such an ass is that he doesn't seem to get that.
He is burning BigTen bridges pretty fast...
|03/15/2013 - 9:00am||I love how well Beilein has||
I love how well Beilein has recruited Indiana!
It's also nice having players familiar with eachother- and who get along. When you get a tight-knit group they can overcome challenges and low-points much better.
|03/13/2013 - 10:32am||72-61 Michigan victory||
72-61 Michigan victory
|03/11/2013 - 1:56pm||He doesn't strike just you||
He doesn't strike just you that way- he was (still is?) in charge of the NCAA's ethics comitte.
Never really heard anything negative about him...
I'm glad our programs have solid and respected coaches!
|03/08/2013 - 12:35pm||You posted about an OSU||
You posted about an OSU article on a Michigan blog- your heart was in the right place. I will upvote you because so many negs without one upvote is sad...
|03/08/2013 - 12:00pm||http://www.infoplease.com/ipa||
NE: CT, ME, MA, NH, NJ, NY, PA, RI, VT
MW: IL, IN, IA, KS, MI, MN, MO, NB, ND, OH, SD, WI
SO: AL, AR, DE, D.C., GL, GA, KY, LA, MD, MS, NC, OK, SC, TN, TX, VA, WV
W: AK, AZ, CA, CO, HI, ID, MT, NV, NM, OR, UT, WA, WY
You could argue the split of the regions for their relevance for BCS conference comparisons- but the south is essentailly equally as large as the northeast and midwest combined now. Yes MD is south and will be in the Big Ten now- but when you say a recruit from the south, or from the midwest etc. this chart works quite well.
Basically the South is responsible for more than half the growth of the country in the last two decades- and there are more states in the south than other regions.
Sports preferance also plays a role. In Chicago and NYC basketball is king, in the south its football, and in the northeast football blows...
|03/07/2013 - 12:34pm||http://mgoblog.com/mgoboard/b||
If you are curious about BTT seedings (and projecting how far we could go).
Otherwise a title is pretty easy- it's just standing. If we beat Indiana we are co-champs (with Indiana for sure- and most likely up to two other teams- whoever stays at 5 losses).
|03/07/2013 - 12:31pm||So much depends on other||
So much depends on other teams:
How do Duke and Miami play in the ACC tounrament and their last games...
How does Kansas wrap up its season- if they lose early in the conference tournament they could fall...
If Gonzaga doesn't win their tournament a one seed could be opened up...
If Georgetown wins the Big East they could jump teams...
If Michigan wins at Indiana we could earn a 1-seed- if we do well in the BTT we could be favored for one even. If Michigan loses to Indiana I'm not sure even winning the BTT would be enough. If we beat Indiana I think a 2 is locked up- if we lose to Indiana and lose early in the BTT a 3 is likely.
|03/07/2013 - 11:22am||Yep stupid mistake- it was on||
Yep stupid mistake- it was on the road...
My main point was every team has "choked" to some degree- or can argue they should be better than 5-losses. Our fan base is quick to say- stupid PSU game, or stupid half-court shot, hell we should be the champs- but other teams have similar gripes in my opinion
|03/07/2013 - 9:32am||What also matters a lot is||
What also matters a lot is who palys which teams only once:
Obviously it is nice to only play top teams once- but what is also key is whether you play top teams at home or on the road if you only play them once. Essentially for just home games you want tough opponents (meaning you played them only once and at home) and for just road you want weak opponents (so you still have a good chance to win even though you get an uneven split with them).
For example, we played Wisconsin only once- but it was on the road- so that is a huge advantage for Wisconsin- had that been changed the whole title race could be different obviously.
Indiana didn't get a chance to avenge its loss to Illinois but didn't have to play inWisconsin- a tough place to play.
Michigan didn't play Iowa and Nebraska on the road- would have been nice to skip on tougher teams. We did not play Minnesota or Wisconsin at home- both solid teams (one hurt us one did not).
Michigan State didn't have to travel to Illinois or Northwestern- like Michigan two weaker teams. MSU also got lucky having road games without homes against Iowa and Penn State- also weaker teams. MSU did have to play all tough teams twice.
OSU hosted Iowa and Minnesota without road games- also two weaker teams. They got luck playing PSU and Purdue only on the road however.
Wisconsin had it pretty good- skipping out on playing us and Purdue on the road- and playing road games against Indiana without being at home (which in liekly would have been a loss anyway) and NW.
So which top teams avoided other top teams?
Indiana skipped WISC on the road
Michigan skipped WISC at home
MSU skipped nobody
OSU skipped nobody
WISC skipped MICH on the road and Indiana at home
WISC had the best schedule all things considered, MSU and OSU had the toughest, with MICH being slightly tougher than Indiana- as far as the schedule against top-5 teasm goes.
However, if we beat Indiana the co-champs will have 5-losses, meaning every team blew some serious chances. Yes half-court at Wisconsin blows, but all the other teams can make very similar arguements. MSU and OSU played all the top teams twice, Indiana blew it against Illinois in not worse of fashion than us against Wisconsin (yes home vs. road makes a big difference though). Well... I guess Wisconsin has very little to complain about... but let's hope MSU beats them at home tonight- I'd rather split the title with MSU than Wisconsin this year.
|03/06/2013 - 9:01am||That year students had it||
That year students had it made for tickets at Michigan- there were lots of incentives for games- so counting free crap you got games were basically free.
The sad part for me is that Purdue this year is much better than that Michigan team. They are 7-9 with two home games left- granted home games against Michigan and Minnesota are tough- they could get to .500- fans should come out and cheer for that. They made the Sweet 16 in '09 and '10, and the tournament the last two years. They have been a solid program, and have decent tradition- it is sad tickets are apparently so easy to come by for this game...
|02/28/2013 - 3:10pm||All very good points.
All very good points.
SOS and other variables would really just make this super crazy to calculate- but would be interesting.
Your reasoning for conf. champs desrerving more credit- at least relative to ncaa champs does seem legitimate.
I get that winning it all requires luck- but every coach to have won a tournament has been an established coach. Yes some young or less-successful coaches have a final four run under their name- but it seems that only elite coaches win championships. Perhaps that is because if a coach does win fans/media immediately elevate them to that status- but that is a completely idfferent issue.
I was not trying to have a diffinitive top-coach list- just putting out a list based on the assumptions I made.
I agree with your point about Wooden- compeltely different era- just thought it'd be an interesting comparison. Any time you cross era comparisons become tricky- and since coaches coach 3-4 decades it can make this challenging.
Maybe if I have time I will try to reevaluate changing some of the variables- most likely with raising the value of conf championships.
Any other changes you think I should make (or others)- and if so include the values you would use.
|02/27/2013 - 1:22pm||Thanks!
Granted I would say a
Granted I would say a majority of commetns that get downvoted are not worth the read- you do get a fair amoutn of quality stuff downvoted for no good reason, and of course a few laugher comments that can be funny...
|02/27/2013 - 12:37pm||True- likely not worthy of||
True- likely not worthy of getting upset about. It's frustrating because he made a very good point/arguement- and it would be missed if it not up-voted again to make it visible without clicking.
Silliness and pettiness with downvoting can really take away from a blog though. ITts pretty immature to downvote if you say another school has more tradition/success than Michigan- plus it plays into all the bad stereotypes of Michigan fans...
|02/27/2013 - 11:40am||How was Rabbit21's comment||
How was Rabbit21's comment flamebait? He used facts and loogic to make a point. It may not be a point you like or approve of- but it wasn't made maliciously, and it was 100% in context of the situation being described...
|02/27/2013 - 11:37am||That'd be a lot of||
That'd be a lot of points!
People love the coaches- but give too little credit for who hired them.
People love the new facilities- but don't like new prices and advertizing
Now that doesn't mean all changes are equal- some things should never be touched- some to the point of being obvious:
school colors (creating new ones- not maize v. neon- although I see why that bothers people), mascot, helmets, block M...
But some things although important to many will have changes:
advertizing in areas it wasn't before, unifroms- more types and different styles, twitter/media- even on the court etc.
No one is going to please everyone- and balancing tradition, school culture, and success is not easy. But as long as you keep the untoucahbles alone, and dont run from what built Michigan- if you have success that is what the job is. And to say DB did any of the unnacceptable things seems silly to me- and he sure has been very successful!
|02/27/2013 - 10:59am||It's what you have to say||
It's what you have to say when you join a new staff- think about any new Michigan coach and how they speak about our history (FERGODSAKES!!!). I think everyone said the right thing in this situation.
Yes UM>Oklahoma in most peoples opinion- and darn near 100% on this blog- but it's not totaly crazy. Oklahoma has a very storied program- plus, much of Michigan's history tat makes our program so storied isn't remembered by this generation of students grandparents
It's pretty clear it seems liek the move was a good one for him- and I wish him well at Oklahoma- I think everyone handled the situation well ans did and said all the right things.
|02/27/2013 - 10:46am||Any time $, uniforms, or||
Any time $, uniforms, or tradition comes up he will ultimately be called out in a thread....
I get why some people dislike him- but it gets old... Especially when the sports programs he oversees are all on the upswing and financially incredibly well off (and for many cases he deserves tons of credit for the upswings due to hires and facility changes)...
|02/27/2013 - 10:43am||Adidas logic:
Let's make new
Let's make new uniforms for fans to buy. If fans don't like them they aren't any less to buy a uniform entirely- so they still will buy our old uniforms. If fans like them they may also buy a whole new uniform
I doubt Adidas cares too much about players performance or comfort in the jerseys- unless it becomes a big pushback that would push schools away from Adidas. Even if they are universaly panned and players say they suck- it won't hurt Adidas financially unless school drop them.
Uniforms are going to keep changing because it makes money- and no one turns down money. KU-MIZZOU split for money, A&M and Texas, MD and Duke, etc.... If there's money in it- it will happen- no matter the tradition, fan reaction, or anything else.
I don't like the uniforms fwiw- but I also don't feel inclined to vomit or feel any repulsion to them. I'd like our retros all the time..
|02/27/2013 - 10:33am||72-68 Michigan||
|02/25/2013 - 1:21pm||Then we do agree- I say||
Then we do agree- I say there is a 75% chance we go at least 3-1 (25% we go 4-0, 50% we go 3-1).
The games being at home are huge- and we have done very well at home over the last two years- but MSU destroyed us, and Indiana is a legit #1 team- both games will be hard.
|02/25/2013 - 9:39am||I can see the logic in a 69%||
I can see the logic in a 69% chance of winning- our home record the last two years is top-notch. I gave the same odds of beating MSU and Indiana- and we played Indiana reasonably close and got clobbered by MSU- so by saying I think they have equal chances of winning both games I am essentially saying I expect much better against MSU than last time- but after that game it is hard for me to be too confident.
Essentially MSU and Indiana are 50-50 to me. I say 25% chance we win both, 50% we split, 25% we lose both.
I thought about giving Pomweray odds instead of my own guesses- maybe that would be a good add for next time (or next year if I do it then too).
|02/25/2013 - 9:35am||I counted all wins at levels||
I counted all wins at levels lower than D-1 (non-high school) but did not give nay points for making DII tournaments, or DII conference championships- so essentially coaches only get the points for non-DI wins but nothing else.
There are a few coaches this impacts- and for Beilein I gave his stats only counting DI to do a DI comparison only for those who are interested.
Perhaps I should have counted those numbers differently- I had to make a lot of assumptions- but any time you do a ranking system you have to...
|02/25/2013 - 9:33am||Definitely true about how it||
Definitely true about how it could change a lot.
How owuld you change it? How do you value an NCAA tournament appearance compared to a win?
When people talk about coaches it seems to center on these things: total wins, ncaa's, final fours, and championships.
Total wins just skews towards experience- avg wins makes most seem pretty similar.
NCAA's are what every teams goal is- so making a tournament seems worthy of a lot of value when disucssing how good a coach is- decreasing it from 20 to me seems like it will devalue that- but I'd love to hear others thoughts on a good number choice.
Final Fours and championships are very tied to being an elite coach- because that is how we judge coaches (and players). Who is the best NBA coach? My guess is people think Phil Jackson and Red Aurbach- any coincidence they have so many titles? That is why I seperated it to pts/yr average as well- so coaches that may not win titles but have good success can be valued. Mark Few for example gets a very high ranking despite no elite eights.
I guess I am saying I totally agree with what you are saying- but I'd like to hear specific reasons why I should change the point system. Yes halving the ncaa or other tournament points may change data (skew it more towards most wins, or average wins compated to tournament success)- but WHY should I do that? I did somewhat arbirtrarily pick 20 for NCAA because it seemed to me like a twenty win season and an NCAA invite are pretty equal- why would I halve or quarter that- what logic is there that 10 or 5 makes mroe sense (it may exist- I'd love to hear your arguement)?
|02/18/2013 - 9:48pm||Not only is it very unlikely||
Not only is it very unlikely both lose three- Wisconsin has a decent chance of wining out (especially in that scenario with them beating MSU so that State has three losses). Wisconsin is in the same position we are with an easier schedule. Essentially no way we could be sole champion of the conference.
|02/18/2013 - 12:14pm||I agree- better to have a||
I agree- better to have a title no matter who else is sharing it with you. My bigger point was it'd be very frustrating to see Wisconsion sharing a title. I don't mind any other team having the title (or a share of it) but Wisconsin having a share of it rubs me the wrong way this year. Let's hope they slip up some other way in their easy remaining schedule and take care of MSU!
|02/18/2013 - 9:43am||All games count the same. If||
All games count the same. If we lost to Wisconsin and trailed the whole game and got outplayed it would not be the one game that stuck out. Last year it was the Purdue at home game that cost us the championship- when any of the other four loses could have meant a championship.
If we had beat Wisconsin obviously we'd be in better shape- plus Wisconsin would be out of it (like OSU)- making it a three team race which would have been very helpful.
It is so hard to beat top teams on the road. MSU and Indiana have to do that now. If they can't beat the top teams on the road it means we beat both and could share a title- if they can beat top teams on the road it means we lost one or both of those games and both teams will finish with great records- and deserve a title over us.
Ultimately for the tournament that will matter less since each game is neutral and we won't have to win on the road. With a young team with six freshman who play that will be a good thing. I think too many fans expect the top-team to win college games when the reality is road games are very, very hard to win. The OSU and Wisconsin game are frustrating due to how we lost- but the reality is both are top-20 teams who protect their courts well- neither of them are a "bad loss" it's just frustrating how we lost. This Michigan team couldn't prove it could win against top teams on the road- teams like that didn't "lose" a championship, they just didn't "earn" one- and that's the spot Michigan is in now.
|02/18/2013 - 9:31am||Sorry about that mistake...||
Sorry about that mistake... nice find! Corrected!
|02/13/2013 - 11:55am||The team has been a top-5||
The team has been a top-5 team all year- not sure how fans are kool-aid drinkers for thinking we are a good team with a chance?
The Clowney hit also came after the worst officiating call ever where we should have not even had the ball. They played a better game than we did- that hit was obviously important- but get over it- we lost to a team that played better than us. We had more losses than you'd hope in a year- but we lost to 3 top 5 teams and lost to Nebraska after our QB got hurt- that's not too bad.
Only idiots or 5 year olds thin ktheir team should win every year- and freak out when they dont. Sports don't work like that.
|02/13/2013 - 11:40am||I'm not sure you understand||
I'm not sure you understand how college sports work...
We are never going to beat teams every year- even bad ones.
Bowl games are all played in locations favorable to opponents for the Big Ten- and for the last decade against conferences far superior to ours.
Lewan is one of the best players to wear a Michigan uniform- and actually played quite well against Clowney who is the most talented player in college.
UM basketball set records this year for winning games- yes our losses have been painful and frustrating- but that is a good thing. Yesterday hurt so bad because people cared and have high hopes- since the Fab Five people have been so numb to a terrible Michigan team (or at least hopelessly mediocre) that such pain wasn't possible.
We are not an elite team this year- we learned that in EL- and the message was very clear. It does not mean we are not a very very good team however. This year there are not clearly dominant teams. Duke lost by 20-something to Miami- who lost to Florida Gulf Coast. Indiana lost to Illinois who most likely won't be .500 in conference- and Butler. Kansas lost to TCU- which is the BigXII's PSU. We have a chance this year still- for the conference and the national title. The odds of that went down after the destruction by MSU- but they are not gone. We got handed a dose of reality- and it sucked- but don't freak out about everything. Last year Michigan basketball split a big-ten title- and that was all it took for that year to be something special. Now the program is big-time, so any set-back will hurt- but I'm glad we finally are in the place where it matters like it does now.
It's easy to say we didn't "man-up" but this team has accomplished a lot. Freshman got half our minutes yesterday. Burke is a sophomore. We have no seniors who play. We played at a pumped up Breslin to a great MSU team. We just played two OT games and had away game at MSU to end the toughest 4-game stretch in recent memory. If we lost by 10 it'd just be frustrating- losing by 20-something is more than frustrating- but no matter how you spin it- it is not doomsday.
That was way too long a response to a crazy post... maybe mine is crazy too...
|02/12/2013 - 9:49am||I love Novak! Part of me is||
I love Novak! Part of me is sad we won't really have guys like him in the near future- since part of what makes him great was being unherladed (and part is pleased because it means lots of talent). It still amazes me that we split the championship last year. The talent this year compared to last is not particularly close- yet last years team was so special- not sure we will ever have another guy quite look Novak again... Glad he will be in attendance though- and it's cool to see the THJR shoutout!
|02/12/2013 - 9:46am||How have only 4 Iowans and 4||
How have only 4 Iowans and 4 Minnesotans (is that right?) played here. You'd think an in-conference state would get more...
|02/12/2013 - 8:17am||To me you foul if you have||
To me you foul if you have fouls to give and it gives you an advantage- I think you "earned" the right to foul. If you foul up by three so the other team gets free-throws instead of a shot attempt I dislike it. To me having so few fould gets the reward of denying a possession if need be whereas fouling to get free-throws instead of a three seems cheap...
Overall I think it is a situation people get worked up on a little that is unlikely to make a huge difference in many cases- but after losing such a game fans become enraged and say the opposite clearly should have been done- had Wisconsin missed the half court I don't think too many Michigan fans would be feeling the same way about this situation as they do now.
|02/12/2013 - 8:11am||Loved it!
If you have more
If you have more content I for one would love to see it!!!
|02/12/2013 - 8:10am||Name the reviewer:
Name the reviewer:
"This movie is like Casablanca only more classic, and more award-worthy"
"This movie gets as many stars as a Purdue recruit- I call a meeting to discuss how to make movies like the SEC"
|02/11/2013 - 1:16pm||All of what you said is true||
All of what you said is true and I don't blame you for your pessismism but its about the schedule. Top teams win at home- if we lost big games at home then I undetrstand the concern and claim we may not be a top conference team. We just happened to play the top teasm on the road first- when we play them at home things should be better. If we can only win at home and cnat take any road games them I understand not being an elite team- but until we play the top teams at home it will be hard to judge just how well we stack up against the Big Ten top teams. If we had the opposite and played all those teams at home and run first the same thing would have applied in reverse.