Correct. Schools bid for site hosting responsibilities back then, so it was determined in advance. If the rule is the 1 seed gets to host, then Denver would have been got it.
I still remember going to the 2002 West Regional semifinals at Yost. Back then, there were 12 teams who qualified, so there was an East Regional with 6 teams and a West Regional with 6 teams - meaning the regional quarterfinal was at a campus site, along with the semifinal. The regional "final" was then held at the Frozen Four. Minnesota played Colorado College in the early game (my father is a U-M alum, so he was excited that the Gophers were in town playing for a chance to make the Frozen Four and asked if I wanted to go).
He then gave his ticket to the evening game to my roommate because my father wasn't interested in Michigan v. Denver. Michigan was the West 4 seed (they beat St. Cloud State the night before) playing 1 seed Denver (who had a bye, along with Minnesota). I have never, to this day, been part of a crowd more amped than Yost was that night. Werner scored to tie it with about 15 minutes to go, which caused a frenzy. Then, when Ortmeyer scored the game winner with under 90 seconds to play, the roof came off.
Denver still complains to this day about that game, and how utterly unfair it was for them (as the 1 seed) to have to play in that environment. That's usually the primary excuse neutral site proponents cite to. Oh well.
I am looking forward to the MGoBlog podcast preview as well because I have yet to see a preview give Michigan much of a chance to win, and it is honestly a little frustrating. While most pundits predict a close game, 90-95% of the analysis ends with some variation of "it's Alabama" or "Michigan can't handle Milroe" as the reason why Michigan will lose. I have enjoyed the FFFF for providing actual analysis as to why Alabama is good but there are paths to a Michigan victory. To be honest, I haven't seen this much disconnect from the pundits and the computers/Vegas (who has refused to move the line to Alabama despite the handle being so one-sided) that it feels like there are pre-written narratives that the analysts just stubbornly refuse to move off of. For example, after Barrett mentioned the other day that the video of the CFP selection reaction was the team shock at FSU being left out, a CBS writer released an entire column that basically amounted to "yeah, right."
UNLV, should it win the MWC, would be 11-2, a conference champion, and likely in the CFP top 25. Remind me again that it was a soft non-conference schedule?
Overall question: does the Big Ten only have authority to suspend for Big Ten games? Does the Big Ten have jurisdiction over CFP games? My guess is that the member schools have to honor disciplinary decisions for all games played by member schools, even non-conference games, but I’m not sure.
So Minnesota and Baylor will have to go undefeated to MAYBE make the playoff, while the pundits are going out of their way to find methods to get Alabama, Oklahoma, Georgia, Ohio State, and/or Oregon into the playoff with one loss (and even over undefeated Minnesota and/or Baylor)?
Essentially, Minnesota and Baylor will be subject to a history tax. “Well, you had the same record and a better profile than those programs, but come on. You are Minnesota and Baylor. Stay in your lane.”
If that happens, what’s the point of the playoff other than for rich programs to get richer?
And to those saying Minnesota is not #7, what’s the argument that they are not right now, other than “they are Minnesota.”
Tuscaloosa doesn’t seem all that excited, considering it is a top 5 matchup. GameDay should have been in Minneapolis, as that’s the better overall story. Alas.
Anybody else worried that if (assuming UM wins out) LSU wins on Saturday, the Committee would leave Michigan out? I mean, would the Committee put a 1 loss, non-division winning Alabama in over a 1 loss, conference winning Michigan, based on some nebulous criteria like the “eye test” and Alabama’s loss was more impressive and conference championships are not important (see Alabama last year)?
I am a UM grad (LSA 2002) and an LUC law grad (2006). I have said for a long time that your heart is always with your college and grad school/professional school is just business. I never in my wildest dreams thought LUC would ever make the NCAA tournament, nonetheless win a game, nevertheless make the Final Four (although they did in 1963, a fact they sell you on during orientation), and certainly never did I think they would play Blue for a spot in the NCG. This is...awkward. But I love Michigan, and that’s where my heart is. Go Blue! Beat the Ramblers!
While I do see Freeze's position in the article as a backtrack from his comments yesterday that he was glad about the ban, the column was about more than just that. I didn't want the title to single Freeze's new position out.
It's still a backtrack from his previous position; and it is definitely the first time an SEC coach has verbalized the effect the ban causes on the actual students.
This would be my answer. However, it was my first sporting event I can remember attending watching a Twins game there with my Dad (he took me out of Kindergarten to go to a weekend day game). The sentimental value alone takes it off this list for me.
But the Tigers won that game. It was Game 1 when Sanchez and the bullpen nearly threw a no hitter. It was the next night, game 2, that most want to forget.
Next week may be the biggest football game for the Gophers in nearly 50 years. Hopefully they can beat Wisconsin because their fanbase has sure earned it.
Gophers have it 4th and 1 going into the wind with 10 seconds left in the first quarter on the Iowa 45...and they punt. No wonder they lost to Illinois.
This may have been covered in past threads, but I can't help but think as long as Brandon is AD, Hoke will get at least 5 years. The main differences between this coaching staff and the last coaching staff is that Brandon inherited RR, while he personally interviewed and made the decision to hire Hoke. That goes a long way. To fire Hoke before the traditional 5 years expires amounts to an implied admission of making a wrong decision - something I am not so sure Brandon is willing to make yet. In my opinion, the only way Hoke does not get a fifth year is if Schlissel ousts Brandon, which likely won't happen. All this talk about a win threshold this year for Hoke seems to miss that point.
But isn't this the third game between Beilein and Boeheim with Beilein at Michigan? I seem to remember a preseason tournament game in Atlantic City a few years ago.
They'd argue that they should be seeded higher than us due to the head to head. I'd counter that game was in Cameron, and non-con wins are weighted too much (Michigan and Duke are different teams now - hard to figure if result would be same).
One of the more enjoyable regular season games I can remember - everything worked in perfect rhythm.
Maybe, just maybe, this will quiet the "yeah, but" crowd concerning Beilein. For far too long they have cited the maxim that Michigan gets lucky because they rely on the three pointer - which allegedly makes them too vulnerable. They refuse to acknowledge that Beilein recruits solid shooters, and finds ways to get them open to the point where there is no luck involved. In fact, I would argue that when Michigan has an offnight shooting, it's luck for the other team.
I don't think there was any skill reason why Canada won today. The US had a horrible game plan that played right into Canada's quasi-neutral zone trap plan (like the mid-90s New Jersey teams that made the NHL unwatchable). The US should have pressed the forecheck in the second half of the game - even if it meant giving up 2 on 1 or 3 on 2 opportunities. At least they would have lost swinging.
After a certain amount of time, the benefit of taking chances carrying the puck in with the skilled forwards a few times outweighed the costs of a 2-1 break the other way.
I was hoping that with the bigger ice that the dump and chase game was over - it essentially makes the game Wisconsin basketball on ice. Unfortunately, it seemed to be all the US did, and Canada was more than happy to let it happen.
I agree that the page click concept for newspapers triggers a lot of these trolling columns, but the pages still have ads on them. If donors pull their advertisements, there would be no ads on the pages that generate clicks, which makes the pages non-existent.
Recent Comments
Correct. Schools bid for site hosting responsibilities back then, so it was determined in advance. If the rule is the 1 seed gets to host, then Denver would have been got it.
I still remember going to the 2002 West Regional semifinals at Yost. Back then, there were 12 teams who qualified, so there was an East Regional with 6 teams and a West Regional with 6 teams - meaning the regional quarterfinal was at a campus site, along with the semifinal. The regional "final" was then held at the Frozen Four. Minnesota played Colorado College in the early game (my father is a U-M alum, so he was excited that the Gophers were in town playing for a chance to make the Frozen Four and asked if I wanted to go).
He then gave his ticket to the evening game to my roommate because my father wasn't interested in Michigan v. Denver. Michigan was the West 4 seed (they beat St. Cloud State the night before) playing 1 seed Denver (who had a bye, along with Minnesota). I have never, to this day, been part of a crowd more amped than Yost was that night. Werner scored to tie it with about 15 minutes to go, which caused a frenzy. Then, when Ortmeyer scored the game winner with under 90 seconds to play, the roof came off.
Denver still complains to this day about that game, and how utterly unfair it was for them (as the 1 seed) to have to play in that environment. That's usually the primary excuse neutral site proponents cite to. Oh well.
I am looking forward to the MGoBlog podcast preview as well because I have yet to see a preview give Michigan much of a chance to win, and it is honestly a little frustrating. While most pundits predict a close game, 90-95% of the analysis ends with some variation of "it's Alabama" or "Michigan can't handle Milroe" as the reason why Michigan will lose. I have enjoyed the FFFF for providing actual analysis as to why Alabama is good but there are paths to a Michigan victory. To be honest, I haven't seen this much disconnect from the pundits and the computers/Vegas (who has refused to move the line to Alabama despite the handle being so one-sided) that it feels like there are pre-written narratives that the analysts just stubbornly refuse to move off of. For example, after Barrett mentioned the other day that the video of the CFP selection reaction was the team shock at FSU being left out, a CBS writer released an entire column that basically amounted to "yeah, right."
Meyer admits he spoke to Ohio State coaches this week. He’s been to Michigan games this year. How is that not advanced in person scouting?
UNLV, should it win the MWC, would be 11-2, a conference champion, and likely in the CFP top 25. Remind me again that it was a soft non-conference schedule?
Overall question: does the Big Ten only have authority to suspend for Big Ten games? Does the Big Ten have jurisdiction over CFP games? My guess is that the member schools have to honor disciplinary decisions for all games played by member schools, even non-conference games, but I’m not sure.
So Minnesota and Baylor will have to go undefeated to MAYBE make the playoff, while the pundits are going out of their way to find methods to get Alabama, Oklahoma, Georgia, Ohio State, and/or Oregon into the playoff with one loss (and even over undefeated Minnesota and/or Baylor)?
Essentially, Minnesota and Baylor will be subject to a history tax. “Well, you had the same record and a better profile than those programs, but come on. You are Minnesota and Baylor. Stay in your lane.”
If that happens, what’s the point of the playoff other than for rich programs to get richer?
And to those saying Minnesota is not #7, what’s the argument that they are not right now, other than “they are Minnesota.”
Tuscaloosa doesn’t seem all that excited, considering it is a top 5 matchup. GameDay should have been in Minneapolis, as that’s the better overall story. Alas.
Anybody else worried that if (assuming UM wins out) LSU wins on Saturday, the Committee would leave Michigan out? I mean, would the Committee put a 1 loss, non-division winning Alabama in over a 1 loss, conference winning Michigan, based on some nebulous criteria like the “eye test” and Alabama’s loss was more impressive and conference championships are not important (see Alabama last year)?
I don't see how they don't make it now. The BTT is for seeding now.
Shouldn't he have gone in the first round?
Is this an old joke?
But isn't this the third game between Beilein and Boeheim with Beilein at Michigan? I seem to remember a preseason tournament game in Atlantic City a few years ago.
One of the more enjoyable regular season games I can remember - everything worked in perfect rhythm.
Maybe, just maybe, this will quiet the "yeah, but" crowd concerning Beilein. For far too long they have cited the maxim that Michigan gets lucky because they rely on the three pointer - which allegedly makes them too vulnerable. They refuse to acknowledge that Beilein recruits solid shooters, and finds ways to get them open to the point where there is no luck involved. In fact, I would argue that when Michigan has an offnight shooting, it's luck for the other team.
Go Blue! Big Ten Champs!