First Bracketology - Michigan an 8 seed
I know these bracketology projections are worth absolutely nothing (just like bowl projections and the like) but it is a little interesting to see how Michigan is perceived at this point before the regular season begins.
It appears that we have a solid team and with Beilein, I expect them to improve throughout the season.
BTW - Michigan State is a #1 seed (no shit) and is projected to play at Little Caesars Arena in round 1.
November 8th, 2017 at 12:31 PM ^
November 8th, 2017 at 12:42 PM ^
Lol. I gotta say, you come up with some good ones.
November 8th, 2017 at 12:50 PM ^
How many virgins' hearts did you tear out to gain this ability to see the future?
November 8th, 2017 at 1:51 PM ^
"weird mayan calendar" i actually preferred this one.
November 8th, 2017 at 3:55 PM ^
Yours is stupid. It reads "first four out" and that's obviously wrong. Also says Wagner will be 2nd Team All B1G so that's encouraging at least.
November 8th, 2017 at 12:38 PM ^
November 8th, 2017 at 12:40 PM ^
All we need to do is get in, and we will.
We will be decent this year, and who knows what we will end up seeded as. One thing is for sure, this championship, unlike football, will be decided on the field/the court rather than in the political backrooms.
Football needs to go to 16 teams, TOMORROW. What bullshit these peole produce in football. Basketball not so much. I enjoy the corresponding beauty of the season so much more than the angst football causes over the beauty contests that the ratings are.
November 8th, 2017 at 12:43 PM ^
Then the football regular season would be pointless as the basketball one. I don't want that.
November 8th, 2017 at 12:47 PM ^
This logic has been proven faulty time and time again; the NCAA tournament is wildly popular, as is their regular season that determines who gets in.
Your way of thinking is that of the stodgy old men who had only one team from our conference going to only one bowl, the Rose Bowl, for many years, and not twice in a row. It was "for the kids', like everything else these hypocrits that are the NCAA produces
November 8th, 2017 at 1:19 PM ^
The touranment is wildly popular, but unfortunately, the regular season is not. No one gives much of rip and no one starts really watching college hoops until February/March. College football cranks up with mass hysteria for week 1 and doesn't slow down. Each week is so critical and many of the games down the stretch are de-facto playoff games.
This is why I like it at 4 teams, but I could see 8 without cheapening the regular season much.
November 8th, 2017 at 1:45 PM ^
I think if it was open to 16 teams there would be much heightened interest because so many more teams would have something to play for right down to the end of the season. Somebody like, say, us! In today's world we know are going to a bowl game that is ultimately meaningless, but if there was a 16 team playoff we would still very much be in it.
Just imagine that first weekend of the playoff, when there are 8 games all over the country. Football Nirvana.
November 8th, 2017 at 2:09 PM ^
Well, that could be. I hadn't really considered the effect of an expanded playoff in terms of increasing the drama for the bubble teams--that's a really good point.
It would be a huge paradigm shift for college football, though. Traditionally it was all about getting to #1. If you wanted to win a national championship, you had to get to #1 and then hold onto the spot. Then with the BCS, it became about getting into the top 2. If you could get to #2, then you were assured of a chance to play #1 in the championship game. Now you just have to get into the top 4, which is much more plausible than #1 or even #2 but still pretty damn hard. That means most teams aren't seriously in contention in any given season--and so the regular season is often more about conference titles, rivalry games, bowl bids, etc. than about national championships.
Going to a 16-team playoff would be a radical departure from that tradition. It would be exciting, absolutely. But would it be worth it? I don't know.
November 8th, 2017 at 2:19 PM ^
half the matchups would be neutral site (ugh) lobsided matchups that no one outside of the college hometwon wants to see. How about 16 seed Va Tech against 1 seed Alabama? I would not even watch it
November 8th, 2017 at 2:25 PM ^
November 8th, 2017 at 3:45 PM ^
Here is a statement on this thread I can agree with. IMO, all games but the final should be played at the field of the higher seed. (#1 being the highest seed)
November 8th, 2017 at 3:48 PM ^
Quite a fan, aren't you.
That is also what a lot of people said about UM vs App St., and now we are subjected to endless replays and references to it. The big upset is the best adrelanin rush in sports next to the buzzer-beater.
November 8th, 2017 at 4:42 PM ^
should be planned for in the playoff. And the larger point is--you do not deserve a shot at NC if you have three losses--you haven't earned it.
In today's college football top teams have a guaranteed 5-6 wins between bad OOC and bad in conference teams. If you can't do better than 3-3 against top teams no one should care about you with regard to playoffs.
November 8th, 2017 at 1:21 PM ^
Lots of straw men there, but no real rebuttal.
The threshold for making the NCAA tournament is so low (68 teams get in) that you merely have to be halfway decent (basically, a .500 or better conference record) to get in. That greatly diminishes the importance of the regular season.
If you allow 16 teams in the CFP, you're now allowing teams to lose up to three games in the regular season. In November, the drama would be only for those on the bubble - those comfortably in would be playing only for seeding purposes. That would be a major change and not for the better. You'd probably see a lot of guys sitting out those final games.
November 8th, 2017 at 2:46 PM ^
This could be solved by giving home field advantage to the higher seeded team for the first two rounds. In such a scenario, seeding becomes a huge deal.
In reality, with a 16 team playoff you're eliminating one or two must-win regular season games and adding two must-win playoff games. Yeah, some games won't matter as much, but there will also be some games that matter a lot more.
If you're worried about regular season games that don't matter, just take a look at our current situation. On the final weekend, the vast majority of teams have no chance to make the playoff, but they don't take the day off. They play hard because they still want to get the best bowl game possible. With a 16 team playoff, I don't see why teams wouldn't still play just as hard in the final weekend to get the best seeding possible and a chance at home field advantage.
November 8th, 2017 at 2:17 PM ^
B-Ball, that's not an argument against what he posted. In fact, a 16 team field is bonkers on principle--no 3 loss team, under any circumstances, deserves to play for the NC, period, end of story. THAT is what would make the regular season lose meaning, some 9-3 team 16 seed beating a 1 seed. I don't want, and never want, to see that outcome, it would be not exciting, but instead totally unfair.
November 8th, 2017 at 3:02 PM ^
Each game matters now (for the most part). Going to 16 teams means big games might not mean much when you have a error margin of a couple of games. It will end up being a popularity contest with 8 or more SEC teams because everyone knows that is the best conference.
No thanks.
November 8th, 2017 at 12:48 PM ^
November 8th, 2017 at 1:33 PM ^
I agree that expanding the football playoff wouldn't make the regular season pointless. But it would diminish the importance of regular season games. The real question is, how much diminiution is too much?
Currently, with only four playoff spots, a single loss can still potentially eliminate you from the playoff and two losses almost certainly does. So about the only way the playoff could ever diminish the importance of a regular season (or conference title) game is if you have, say, two undefeated teams playing at the end of the season under circumstances where the loser would surely receive a playoff bid regardless. That's pretty far-fetched under the current arrangement, as there are likely to be a number of 1-loss teams, G5 undefeateds, etc. clamouring for spots so that the stakes always remain high no matter what.
If you expand to six or eight teams, it becomes slighly more possible that a team could go into a late season game undefeated, knowing it will still make the playoff even with a loss. But even if that happens here and there, it probably still isn't very common and doesn't serious affect the regular season.
But if you start getting to 12 or 16 teams, then eventally you reach the point when teams at the very top know they are in regardless, and so the stakes go down.
The sweet spot seeems to probably be around six or eight teams. It would also be good if they could bring home field advantage into play somehow, but that seems like a pipe dream with the current NCAA.
November 8th, 2017 at 2:49 PM ^
careful, we're working towards the scenario you laid out. If (a big IF I know), Georgia and Alabama go into SEC title undefeated you think loser gets kicked out of playoff? I don't know...
November 8th, 2017 at 2:37 PM ^
The whole "pointless" argument was pushed by the bowl games and their mouthpieces (networks profiting from the games) to stop a playoff from ever happening in the first place, yet here we are getting pissed off because Michigan does not kill Cincinnati. Yes, there is less emphasis on winning every single game than there used to be, but there is also less reliance on a bunch of voters that can choose a national champion based on any factor other than an actual game.
November 8th, 2017 at 1:05 PM ^
November 8th, 2017 at 12:44 PM ^
November 8th, 2017 at 12:53 PM ^
You just said, "this is dumb, but probably about right." You thus seem to imply it's dumb but right, which would make it smart, and thus not dumb...???
November 8th, 2017 at 1:05 PM ^
a broken clock is right twice a day.
the practice of doing bracketology before the season starts is dumb, but you have 65 chances to make an accurate guess, so one of those guesses is likely to be plausible.
November 8th, 2017 at 1:34 PM ^
You should write "The Book of FauxMo" teaching the world your wisdom. I have learned much from you and feel blessed and nourished from your teachings.
November 8th, 2017 at 1:42 PM ^
Dumb and right aren't mutually exclusive. I'm dumb but right every so often.
November 8th, 2017 at 8:09 PM ^
November 8th, 2017 at 12:44 PM ^
I'm saying 5 or 6 seed. It's going to take a while for this engine to purr. 8 seed is underselling us.
November 8th, 2017 at 12:46 PM ^
Does this factor in the 2 seed drop because the committee still disproportionally looks at dumb ol' RPI?
November 8th, 2017 at 12:49 PM ^
November 8th, 2017 at 1:07 PM ^
Considering that Stauskas was B1G POTY and was challenging for National POY the year after Burke left, if Matthews can do better than that I'm already giddy about how this season could go.
November 11th, 2017 at 7:46 PM ^
So that's a great point and I would agree Stauskas is an amazing legend in michigan basketball history, but that's just how much respect I have for what Matthews can do.
November 8th, 2017 at 1:07 PM ^
Better than Big Ten POY and lottery pick Nik Stauskas?
November 8th, 2017 at 2:36 PM ^
I hope so. We need to replace a lot of scoring this year and I'm guessing our overall defense will be a little worse without DJ Wilson. Without a veteran pg like Walton, he'll need to create his own shot too.
November 11th, 2017 at 7:48 PM ^
So good news is we have a veteran 5th year senior transfer Jaaron Simmons who is perfectly suited to Beilein's p&r offense. One issue might be his ability to share the floor with Matthews, who is more of an ISO player but if they can find a way to meet in the middle we are going to have an elite offense.
November 8th, 2017 at 3:36 PM ^
he has a chance to be better than Burke.
November 8th, 2017 at 12:52 PM ^
I also need the predictions for the 2084 college playoff.
November 8th, 2017 at 12:55 PM ^
Alabama will probably be in there as the one for the 65th straight year.
November 8th, 2017 at 1:14 PM ^
November 8th, 2017 at 1:10 PM ^
2084 College Football Playoffs, buy seed:
1) Texas vs 8) Northern California (new D1 school as of 2055)
2) USC vs 7) Michigan
3) Florida vs 6) Puerto Rico State
4) Ohio State vs 5) Syracuse
November 8th, 2017 at 1:17 PM ^
I would think that's accurate, and I am certain that the only reason Syracuse got in is that the committee was simply unwilling to really give any real credence to winning the Non-Terran Moons Conference, since really the Saturn Division is Titan University, Rhea State and then a bunch of tire fires, some with real fires in the middle of them. No one ever wants to go to Neptune and play on Triton in November either, so they have their own scheduling issues.