Penalize the team that ducked competition. Nebraska played 10 games in what, 20 days? No excuse for SCUM to end up only having played 17 games.
Yes, it's likely they would win those games.The games that weren't rescheduled were @Penn St, Indiana at home and @Northwestern. Ducking the competition is a bit strong.
Maryland had a terrible record when they played us in Champaign and Ayala was out. It was very likely that we would win that game. Please adjust our record accordingly.Yes, it's likely they would win those games.
I believe that Michigan played poorly last night in large part because of Illinois' defense. But it did have something to do with them being flat, I'd guess. They could be flat against those teams. It's why you play the games.
Am I wrong.. or is this right...
We win at OSU and Michigan Splits with MSU.. we win the regular season title.. We could be playing for the #1 seed in the big on Saturday vs OSU if Michigan loses Thursday...
it would be 80% us 78% them on their games..
am I wrong?
Even if you consider Michigan has a 80% chance to win each of its 3 games (conservative estimate), 80% * 80% * 80% = 51.2% chance to win all 3 games. Share the title if Illini are 0.5 games ahead as of Sunday.
It's truly mind boggling that the Big Ten could look at two teams who went 16-4 and 14-3, with the 16 win team winning the only head to head game between the two, and not call them co-champions. They have effectively assumed Michigan would win all the games it didn't play. Co-champions recognizes the reality that there are 3 distinct outcomes if Michigan had played those games (Illinois outright, Michigan outright, co-champs) and picks the one that doesn't favor either team. Unreal.
Actually, don't focus on the nose.
I'm thinking that Izzo sent Sissoko out there and told him to take Ayo out of the game. Sissoko comes back to the bench and gets chewed out by Izzo because Ayo's still playing.
Sissoko: "Coach, I broke his nose. What more do you want me to do?"
Izzo: "Next time, sweep his leg."
It doesn't really matter if Michigan squeaks into the Championship based on this ruling, which is lame. There's more basketball to play after the regular season, and it doesn't even matter much if you are seeded 1 or 2 in the NCAA tourney.
Have less 2 seeds won the tourney because they began the tourney on the 2 line? Or because better teams are typically 1 seeds? Meaning, is it more about the team? Or more about the seeding? If we put each of those 1 seeds on the 2 line, would their results have been different? Or the same?20 1-seeds have won the NCAA tournament.
5 2-seeds have won the NCAA tournament.
Have less 2 seeds won the tourney because they began the tourney on the 2 line? Or because better teams are typically 1 seeds? Meaning, is it more about the team? Or more about the seeding? If we put each of those 1 seeds on the 2 line, would their results have been different? Or the same?
It’s a hypothetical question, of course, no way to know for sure. But my guess is: it’s more about the individual teams that earned a 1 seed than it is the line they began the tournament on.
In order for him to whine, he’d have to admit we are good (which he has completely failed to mention in any of his Interviews). That would be sweet.I understand the sentiment of wanting Michigan to lose 2 to MSU, but then MSU might sneak into the ncaa tournament and I want to see Izzo whine about being excluded.