We could have beat Michigan..You agree?****NM
- Thread starter BombadEER
- Start date
"Could" have, certainly, but probably wouldn't have. Interesting contrast of styles, but Beilein's team won fairly easily the last time that they met.
A game from 5 years ago during one of WVUs worst basketball seasons since 2002 and Michigan's best has little to do with this current season. I'd say WVU would have a 50-50 shot at least against Michigan if the game were played today. Only teams clearly playing better than WVU in the Sweet 16 were Nova, Kansas, Duke, and Texas Tech. Not saying WVU was definitely better than the other 7 teams, but don't think they were definitely better than WVU.
It's all about matchups, which is why you can't compare scores of how one team competed against two common opponents. It simply doesn't work that way.
Michigan actually didn't play to their capability throughout the tournament, except for the game against A&M. Other than that game, their shooting was simply horrible. Defense won those other five games for them.
As for a matchup between UM and WVU, it would certainly be an interesting one. On one hand, Michigan is very suspect when a team was pressuring them full court, so that would have been a major issue. On the other hand, if they were able to handle the pressure, WVU was suspect when it came to giving up open 3's, particularly in the corners, where UM typically does well.
Michigan actually didn't play to their capability throughout the tournament, except for the game against A&M. Other than that game, their shooting was simply horrible. Defense won those other five games for them.
As for a matchup between UM and WVU, it would certainly be an interesting one. On one hand, Michigan is very suspect when a team was pressuring them full court, so that would have been a major issue. On the other hand, if they were able to handle the pressure, WVU was suspect when it came to giving up open 3's, particularly in the corners, where UM typically does well.
As much as I would like to answer as a homer, this thread is the ultimate "should have been a contender" thread. Michigan won more games. Michigan was national champ runner up. We weren't.
You're assuming a lot, based upon nothing more than the fact that WVU crushed 12th and 13th seeds in the NCAA Tournament. No matter how you slice it, WVU had an incredibly easy path to the Sweet 16, then faced the best team in the Tournament.
True, but they want UofM to send them the national runner-up banner, all because they lost be fewer points than other teams.
Make sense?
I'm basing my assessment on the same nothing you are with WVU would be more likely to lose than win. You used WVU vs A&M in November and Michigan vs A&M in the tournament to back up a previous argument, but would you give me the same credence in saying that WVU gave Villanova a much better game than Michigan did just over a week ago? A game does not a season make. Both teams are good. Both teams played well in the post season tournaments, both teams have flaws that kept them from being as dominant throughout the year as Villanova, Kansas, and the like. Therefore, I disagree with an assumption that Michigan is head and shoulders better than WVU in regards to the 2017-2018 basketball season.
Probably won't be, but WV should be in top 10 in final poll after I have
seen all of this play out. I don't think Mich had to beat anyone higher than
a 6 to get there. Luck of the draw. We gave Vill all they wanted, and
final score is not indicative how tough and good game it was.
No, Bell, I did not post that Michigan is head and shoulders better than WVU, but disagree with your "50-50" argument. Michigan had won 14 games in a row before the NCG, and notwithstanding the argument made by others to the contrary, Michigan beat much better teams in tournament play than WVU did.
To be fair, it's certainly not Michigan's fault that Virginia, Xavier, Cincinnati, Gonzaga, North Carolina, Arizona, Ohio State, and Tennessee all lost. Not to mention, one could also argue that those seed numbers Michigan beat along the road to the title game were simply that....seed numbers. When you dig deeper, one has to believe that Loyola-Chicago being an 11 seed, certainly wasn't amongst the 41-44 ranked teams, and likely more deserving of a 4,5, or 6 seed. The committee obviously seeded them based on the name on the front of the jersey, as opposed to the quality of the team. Houston is a valid top 25 team, and tough as nails. Texas A&M, had they not gotten on the weed, and suffered injuries during the middle part of the season is definitely a top 25 caliper team. Florida State at a 9 may or may not have been seeded correctly, but that was a pretty damn good ball club, and likely tinkering close to the top 25.
Maybe we have differing views on "probably" wouldn't win. If I say that, it means I think one team is definitively better than the other. Upsets happen just like that undefeated Kentucky team 3 years ago which was the best team in the tournament, still got upset. By the Big 10, btw. Yet it was still an upset and Kentucky was the better team.
To your other point, WVU never got a chance to play those teams. You can't say Michigan didn't get incredibly lucky in their path to championship game as well. Switch the 2 teams positions in the bracket and WVU would be more likely to be in the title game than Michigan to make it to the Elite 8, much less go through TTU and Kansas to make it on the other side of the bracket. So on one side Michigan is so much better and you ignore that they played 5 relatively weak teams on their side, but are quick to point out WVUs cake walk. WVU did everything it could ... blow out those weak teams. Then got bounced when it faced the best team in the tournament the same way Michigan was. Michigan did play great against A&M and barely survived the only other decent team they played in Houston. FSU, upstart Loyala, and the throw away 14 seed they played weren't exactly world beaters. Again, not saying Michigan is not good. Just saying it wouldn't be a big upset either way if WVU and Michigan had met in the tournament.
Put WVU in Michigan's bracket, and it loses to Texas A&M again, this time in the Sweet 16. A 23-point beat down supports my argument. Wild speculation and excuses support yours. Incidentally, A&M ripped North Carolina by 21 before Michigan blew out the Aggies. The assumption that WVU would have beaten A&M is absurd.
Michigan beat Texas Am which is proof of that. Yeah Yeah But But Blah Blah.
WVU would more likely beat Texas A&M, FSU, and Loyola than Michigan would've beaten Villanova. Not saying WVU would've done it, just saying Michigan is less likely to have done better on WVU's side than WVU matching Michigan's performance on their side.
I like how I can't use WVU giving Villanova a tougher game than Michigan, yet you can use "Michigan beat this team which beat this other team and your team, therefore I'm right." I'm done debating this point when the obvious bias blinds the hypocrisy being used and the blatant cherry picking of facts.
Final Rankings are more of and Indication than seeding. The Ncaa Tourney is final examination time.
You're making no sense whatsoever. Losing by 12 instead of 17 to Villanova doesn't cancel out losing to Texas A&M by 23 vs. Michigan's 22 point romp over the Aggies.
in the same season Oklahoma beat Villanova by 23 and lost to Villanova by 44.
Obviously Michigans season would have ended in the Sweet 16 had they traded places with WV. Im not sure you could say the same inversed.
Both were clearly formidable teams with good regular and postseasons. They should get a home and home or a NYC game going. I suspect both coaches and fan bases would be up for it and ESPN would air it in prime time.
Obviously Michigans season would have ended in the Sweet 16 had they traded places with WV. Im not sure you could say the same inversed.
Both were clearly formidable teams with good regular and postseasons. They should get a home and home or a NYC game going. I suspect both coaches and fan bases would be up for it and ESPN would air it in prime time.
if 6 years constitutes not too long ago. 6 years ago WVU entered the BXII coming off a 70-33 Orange Bowl win over Clemson & was a top 5 program. things don't stay the same.
I'd be up for UM vs Press Virginia. Not many B1G teams on the hoops schedule. MD game a few years back was a fun one.
I'd be up for UM vs Press Virginia. Not many B1G teams on the hoops schedule. MD game a few years back was a fun one.
Didn't WVU bend The Ohio State over in Columbus not too long ago? Won by almost 30 points.......
I recommend you not engage. I did and its clear he'll accept logic when it supports OSU or the Big 10. However, he will do mental gymnastics, demonstrate hypocrisy, and/or ignore facts that don't support his position. This guy is a classic case of confirmation bias, not that I expect he knows what that is in the setting of scientific experimentation.
Don't worry, I'm sure he'll have some reason why that loss isn't indicative of anything negative toward OSU, yet any loss by WVU even beyond half a decade ago is indicative of WVU sucking as a basketball program. Of course the reason will only make sense to him or anyone else that just wants confirmation of their preexisting assumptions.
While your numbers definitely support your case. You can never use the "we beat the team, that beat the team" theory because Pitt would have been your 2016 NCAA champs in football.
He had excuses for why 2014 OSU shouldn't have been judged by losing at home to a VT team that went on to lose to ECU and Wake Forest. Yet he is all knowing about WVU in March because of an opening game. It can't be both ways and if you think it is, you are deluded yourself with bullshit reasoning.
So the 2012 - 13 season was identical to the 2017-18 teams. Interesting concept.
Same coaches, T-Bone/Allen. WVU fans (even in this thread) are still boasting about WVU's beating Ohio State in 2009, so, perhaps, you should drench them with your tears for living in the past.
UM wore down pretty quickly after the first five minutes or so. Nova pushed them around pretty easily
and they couldn't hit the threes. WVU may have had the same impact. UM needs to hit the weights.
and they couldn't hit the threes. WVU may have had the same impact. UM needs to hit the weights.
You must have had your bell rung, Bell. I posted that Ohio State had a different QB at the end of the season than it had vs. Virginia Tech. This is a FACT, not an excuse.
I understand your point, but I will take numbers and head-to-head results over gut feelings by biased fans, any day of the week, and twice on Sunday.
