Good stuff from Ron Burton tonight as far as an all-around progress report on the position.

He seems to be enjoying having Chuck Bullough as a tag-team partner on the d-line. He likes the perspective Bullough brings as well as the passion.

That's one high energy, high intensity duo.

Here's my notebook

https://michiganstate.rivals.com/news/burton-sees-improved-pass-rush-from-michigan-state-d-tackles

I posted some of these observations on the board already, but here's a notebook with 10 of the more intriguing nuggets from interviews today, including Tressel's comments about Mike Panasiuk being the MVP on defense thus far during spring ball.

https://michiganstate.rivals.com/news/ten-takeaways-big-mike-doing-big-things-other-developments

Lewerke says he'll try and take fewer risks in the passing game, and as a runner in '18.

I think I remember my Sunday School teacher saying something about the road to hell being paved with good intentions.

In other words, I'll believe it when I see it.

Anyway, here is a Lewerke notebook

https://michiganstate.rivals.com/news/lewerke-intends-to-play-smarter

And here is the video from the story

Login to view embedded media

Here is the story I wrote on Warner's challenge to Scott to be a complete player. It's good stuff, and Warner's frank and honest conversation is refreshing. I hope it comes through that he cares about Scott, because that's my sense. But he's not sugar-coating anything either. He's laying things out the way they are, and that's what Scott needs to hear.

https://michiganstate.rivals.com/news/warner-challenges-scott-to-be-a-complete-rb-team-leader

Here is my notebook from Dantonio's pre practice briefing

https://michiganstate.rivals.com/ne...e-controlled-scrimmage-format-for-spring-game

As the minutes tick down to the 2018 Final Four, I can't help but consider what could have been if things would have played out slightly differently. Here are the 5 questions that have been rattling around in my head this week:

1) How would MSU have have viewed the season and tournament had UofM lost to Houston and MSU had beaten Syracuse, but lost to Duke by 20 points?

2) If MSU and UofM were to have traded tournament draws, how would things have played out? Would UofM have even beaten Bucknell or Syracuse? Would MSU gotten past Houston? Would MSU have made the FF?

3) If Bridges would not have come back, how would the season have played out? (This one is a little tricky based on the lack of perimeter depth, but let's say for argument's sack that Arhens was healthy). MSU would certainly have lost more games, but would the other players have developed more? Would MSU been placed on a more favorable part of the bracket and advanced farther?

4) If UofM beats Loyola tonight but loses on Monday, what if MSU had beaten Syracuse and then gotten hot and beaten Duke, KU, and Nova? Would MSU have been able to beat UofM in the title game? As an MSU fan, would you trade one more Final Four if it gave UofM a Natty? Would you accept a loss in the 2nd round if it ensured UofM doesn't win a Natty?

5) If UofM wins on Monday night, is it the worst end to any sports season of all time for MSU fans?

I have an opinion on all of these, but I am curious to the opinion on the board

Here is a link to the article I wrote on Lombardi on the front page

https://michiganstate.rivals.com/news/lombardi-getting-critical-reps-needed-for-back-up-qb-role

With all of the UofM hang wringing / lovefest, let's put things in a bit of perspective here. My question is this: How does Beilein compare to some of the other coaches of teams that have "cycled up" during the Tom Izzo era?

How about Bo Ryan? I believe that he finished his career with a winning record against Izzo, won 4 Big Ten titles, and 3 tournament titles, and went to 2 Final Fours.

How about Thad Matta? Matta had his share of wins over Izzo, won 5 Big Ten titles, 4 tournament tile, and also has 2 Final Fours.

How about Bruce Weber, or Tom Crean, or even Matt Painter? Those guys have had some nice runs.

By my count, Beilein has 2 Big Ten title and 2 BT tournament titles, and now also 2 Final Fours. He could win a title next Monday. That would be a nice feather in his cap, but it would also be the same number of titles as Kevin Ollie.

What Michigan has shown is that they are no longer a laughing stock. Beilein can certainly coach and (which the help of A LOT of good fortune) has maxed out his current team. But, let us also not forget that as recently as the week before the 2017 BTT, a lot of Michigan fans thought that maybe they needed to move on. That was 13 months ago. Yes, Michigan had two consecutive years when they out-performaned MSU in March. But, even in this "golden age" of UofM basketball (since 2011), MSU still has more total wins, more Big Ten titles, and more BTT titlesin that span.

Like Illinois, Ohio State, Purdue, and Wisconsin, Michigan has cycled up to be a legit contender right now. But, MSU under Izzo has been, and shall continue to be, the gold standard in the Big Ten. Yes, this year sucked. Yes, MSU has underachieved the last three time we have had a Top 3 seed. That is a concern, but I am not convinced there is much going on there other some bad luck. Any other conclusion is recency bias. Just because MSU has not made the Sweet 16 in the past three years does not mean MSU is going to suddenly be an NIT team and Michigan is going to win the next 8 Titles. We just have to actually take them seriously. As for my original question, I think it is pretty clear that Bo Ryan and Thad Matta both had more successful careers than Beilein to this point.

As for the Michigan love-fest, I want no part of that. As I have stated many times before, MSU-UofM is a virtual zero-sum game. Their success is objectively bad for us. The primary reason for this is that they always get disproportionately more praise when they succeed than MSU does, and disproportionately more slack when they fail. That is just the way life is. It is no secret that historically UofM has tried to keep MSU down. This only gives that movement more ammunition.

Athletic success to their entitled, arrogant, narcissistic fan-base is like giving a bottle a whiskey to an alcoholic. So, "Uncle John" might a nice guy and good at his job, but you never want him to get a hold of a bottle of wine or he will just ruin Christmas for everyone. That is essentially what happened this year. Michigan is going to hear nothing but praise for the next week (and hopefully not longer than that). There is no need for MSU fans to contribute out of some sense of fairness or respect. They never show MSU fairness or respect, and I see no reason to "take the high road." They don't deserve it. You are only enabling their bad behavior. Unlike UofM fans, I don't give a rat's behind what they think of us. Screw them.

I hope Loyola beats them by 100.

FIVE THINGS TO KNOW ABOUT: MSU's Jersey Scrimmage

Jim Comparoni • SpartanMag.com
@JimComparoni

EAST LANSING - Michigan State staged its first Jersey Scrimmage of the spring, Thursday at Spartan Stadium.

Media were not allowed to attend.

So what can we glean out of the morsels of information released on Thursday? Here are my Five Things To Know about Thursday's closed scrimmage:

1. L.J. SCOTT PLAYED AT LEAST A LITTLE BIT


LJ Scott (3) maneuvers around defensive tackle Raequan Williams (99) during Thursday's scrimmage. Photo courtesy MSU.

Michigan State released a photo from the the scrimmage, with Scott carrying the ball, between the tackles, working through and past Raequan Williams.

Photo worth a thousand words?

My Take: I’m not expecting Scott to get a lot of live-tackle work this spring. He has had some upper-body injuries, and procedures, in the past. Michigan State has rested workhorse upper class running backs in past springs, such as Scott last year and Le’Veon Bell in 2012.

The fact that Scott was in uniform and carrying the ball in this scrimmage, first of all, indicates that he is feeling good, with all body parts functioning well. He missed some practice time at the outset of spring, so it was good to see him back out on the field and in working order. The time he missed is not believed to be due to physical ailments.

Michigan State didn’t release stats from the scrimmage, so we don’t know how many carries Scott had. My guess is that he didn’t play much, maybe a carry here or there. That would be the wise thing to do, in my opinion. Coaches know what he can do, and he knows the playbook (although he had some foggy moments in 2016). So this is a time to maybe give him a glimpse or two of scrimmage speed, and then rest the wheels and parts for most of the off-season.

Let the record show, or at least the photograph, that there were no grass stains or dirt stains on Scott, Williams or the first offensive lineman in the photo released by Michigan State. Those uniforms were laundry-room clean. There is a little grass stain on the knee of the right guard. I suspect that that photo was shot on one of the first plays of the scrimmage.

So it’s good that Scott was in uniform, getting some work. But I’m not concluding for a second that he had more than a handful of reps. And don’t expect a statistical release stating he carried the ball 20 times for 100 yards.

2. I'M LEFT WONDERING ABOUT THE OTHER RUNNING BACKS


Connor Heyward, shown here during last week's practice, needs to emerge as a reliable second-string running back this spring.

Madre London has transferred to Tennessee. Gerald Holmes has graduated. If Scott didn’t play much, as is the usual mode of operation for Michigan State personnel decisions in the spring, then how about second-stringer Connor Heyward?

Great question. I don’t know. We’ll try to learn more during interviews on Friday - the first time we will have a chance to conduct interviews in more than two weeks.

3. CAM CHAMBERS MADE A PLAY


Sophomroe WR Cam Chambers tries to break the tackle attempt of Tre Person during Thursday's scrimmage with Tyson Smith (15) converging.

Chambers, the big, sophomore receiver, is shown running with the ball during the scrimmage, presumably after a reception. He’s working against a tackle attempt by sophomore cornerback Tre Person in the photo while cornerback Tyson Smith is also in the frame.

MY TAKE: I’m not afraid to comment on a still photo. Heck, I have an opinion after watching a cloud or a train go by, so why not have an opinion on a still photo from a scrimmage.

First of all, the grass looks pretty solid. Not a bad thing for mid-to-late March. These can be cold, soggy days, most years. The cold isn’t a problem. Dry cold is good for a field, giving the players a chance to get outside and scrimmage at the stadium.

As for Chambers, it’s a majorly important spring for the 6-foot-2, 215-pound wide out from Sicklerville, N.J.

With Hunter Rison and Trishton Jackson having transferred, there is room for a fourth wheel in the receiving corps to go along with Felton Davis, Darrell Stewart and Cody White. Someone needs to jump into the playing group and earn trust.

Chambers enrolled at Michigan State two years ago as a mid-year guy along with Donnie Corley. Corley, Jackson and and Rison each edged ahead of Chambers in the receiver pecking order. But Chambers has made slow, steady progress behind the scenes. With Corley long having gone away, and now Rison and Jackson gone, it’s time for Chambers to have a statement spring.

Chambers had five catches for 66 yards last year, and was targeted (incomplete) on a deep post in the end zone late in the Holiday Bowl, getting reps ahead of Jackson and/or Rison.

I’m not ready to proclaim that a photo of Chambers trying to battle through a tackle after an apparent catch signals his arrival. But if I were an Michigan State fan and there were any player I would want to see depicted in a still photo after the first scrimmage of the spring, it would be Chambers. He was in uniform, he looked the part, he made a play. That’s positive.

4. THE SPARTANS SCRIMMAGES FOR ONLY 60 SNAPS
That’s a low number of snaps for a scrimmage, but not a low number for the first scrimmage of a spring. The Spartans often scrimmage for 90-plus snaps during the peak days of spring football or August camp. The Spartans are likely building up to that level.

Michigan State had regular practice time at the outdoor practice fields at the Duffy Daugherty Building on Thursday before walking across Shaw Lane to finish the day with the 60-snap scrimmage at Spartan Stadium.

“We practiced and scrimmaged both, so we got a lot done,” Dantonio said in a set of short quotes released by the university. “You come over to the stadium and let them play. The coaches are off the field and there’s no do-overs. There’s referees, you pipe in some crowd noise, and everything is game like. So we try and simulate game-like situations the best we can for them. I think that’s the biggest thing and how you grow the best. You put pressure on them and put them in different situations, or allow the situations to take place, rather than script them.”

The Spartans were off two weeks ago due to spring break. Last week, they practiced in shells (shoulder pads, no leg pads) on Tuesday, March 13 and then practiced for the first time in full pads on Thursday, March 15. Two more padded practices on Saturday and Tuesday set the foundation for this week’s scrimmage on Thursday.

Six practices remain prior to the Green-White Game at 5 p.m. on April 7 at Spartan Stadium.

5. THE DEFENSE WON. BIG DEAL?
The defense won the scrimmage, 12-3.

MY TAKE: Not much. Low-scoring scrimmage on a day with limited snaps.

Dantonio has been known to alter the scoring as a scrimmage goes along in order to set up a close finish, to put pressure on the offense to execute late. Maybe that wasn’t the case this time, or perhaps the defense is that far ahead right now. Hard to say. Either way, no big deal. But you don't want the offense to win a 45-43 shootout in the first scrimmage of the spring. Show me high-scroring scrimmages and I'll show you a leaky team in the fall.

“You have to watch the film to see how everybody played, but the positive thing is you step back and let people play,” Dantonio said. “We have some young quarterbacks and we let them go today. They made some throws and they made some mistakes, but that’s all part of it. I thought it was a good day today.”

As has been the case in recent years, Dantonio’s quotes following scrimmages offer little information on which individuals or position groups played well, or which ones struggled.

But he did reveal that young quarterbacks played, made some throws and some mistakes. I saw Rocky Lombardi outside the stadium on Thursday during my walk from the stadium parking lot to Breslin Center for the high school state semifinals. Rocky looks like he always does - happy to be on campus.

I also saw linebacker Joe Bachie as he left the stadium and walked to the Skandalaris Center. He looked good and cranky.

“He was a young player last year, a very dynamic player,” Danotnio said of Bachie. “I think he can build on things, in terms of knowledge. He’s got leadership skills; I think he can build on that leadership skill.”

As for the young quarterbacks getting a chance to play, I took that to mean Lombardi and true freshman Theo Day. Day enrolled at Michigan State in January. Putting him on the field after just seven practices, and three in pads against the Spartan defense surely made for one of the most educational football experiences of his young career, and probably one with more than a few miscues. But he’ll be ahead of where a regular freshman QB would be in August when preseason camp starts.

No details were released on Lombardi’s performance. It’s a big spring for the redshirt freshman from Des Moines, Iowa, as he is the unquestioned second-string QB behind Brian Lewerke, due to the transfer of Messiah de Weaver.

* Michigan State will practice again on Friday. Media will be allowed to watch, although there’s a chance the players won’t be in full pads, having scrimmaged a day earlier.

Due to the defense's victory on Thursday, the defense will now be wearing the green jerseys. The offense wore green at the outset of spring practice this year because the offense won the last scrimmage of preseason camp in August. These things can carry over for a long time, which puts a little extra incentive and pride on the line for the scrimmages.

WILLIS STEPPING UP


Khari Willis had a productive 2017 and is working to make further statements in 2018. (Photos courtesy MSU)

Dantonio said this about his team when they practiced for the first time in pads, last week, after a week off for spring break:

“They had a great attitude coming back from spring break. We have good leadership from our older guys. I really feel like our football team is all going in one direction, and that’s a very positive thing.”

Compliments for senior leadership is a theme for spring practice thus far. Bachie, Lewerke and Khari Willis seem to be the unquestioned alpha dogs of the group this year, which is a welcomed change from the uncertainty of last spring and the lack of success from the year before.

“Guys like Khari, myself and Joe Bachie have stepped up, trying to lead this team,” Lewerke said. “Khari was a leader for us last year, but I can definitely tell that he has recognized his role and stepped up even more.”

Willis (6-0, 214, Sr., Jackson) was honorable mention All-Big Ten last year by media and coaches. He recorded 71 tackles after starting all 13 games at boundary safety. He had 5.5 tackles for loss and 4.0 sacks.

Willis spent a portion of winter conditioning studying film of himself and the defense as a whole.

“We’ve seen things on film throughout the year and after the year, after doing studies, coaches doing studies, looking for ways to get better and there’s a lot of them,” he said. “So we’re going to go out and try to make the most of those opportunities.”

The 12-3 victory in the Jersey Scrimmage probably sits well with Willis.

“I’m juts very excited to be back out, being able to play football,” he said.


PRO DAY ON TAP
MSU’s annual Pro Day scouting combine will take place from 1 to 3 p.m. on Friday.

“We have five guys working out (Brian Allen, Demetrius Cooper, Chris Frey, Gerald Holmesand Brett Scanlon), and that’s the fewest we’ve ever had,” Dantonio said. “But they’ve been good players for us and a lot of NFL teams will be here represented. Pro Day will be a little smaller for us this year, but that’s not a bad thing, because it means most of your guys are back. It should be a great day.”

Michigan State is one of only five schools to have had at least one player chosen every year since the inception of the common NFL Draft in 1967. MSU joins Florida, Michigan, Nebraska and USC as the only programs with at least one draft choice for 51 consecutive years. Hopes and expectations rest with Allen to continue to that streak.

As we all come to terms with the tremendously disappointing end to the season, let’s try to put things into perspective using some historical numbers in the modern tournament era (1979 to now)

This year, MSU failed to make the Sweet 16 for the third consecutive year. Yes, that sucks. But, Izzo has a total of 13 Sweet 16 appearances, which is tied for 6th all time:

Coach K – 24
Roy Williams – 18
Jim Boeheim – 18
Dean Smith – 15 (in the modern era)
Calipari – 14
Izzo -- 13 (tied with Olson, Pitino, Calhoun, and Self)

Furthermore, if we consider the rate at which coaches reach the S16, Izzo still gets there 62% of the time. Only two active coaches with more than 10 tournament games are over 70%: Coach K (71%) and Calipari (74%), and only Bill Self (65%), Roy Williams (64%), and Sean “I can’t get to the Final Four” Miller (64%) are in the 60s.

How about Regional Finals?

Coach K – 14
Roy Williams – 13
Pitino – 12
Calipari – 11
Dean Smith – 10 (in the modern era)
Izzo -- 9 (tied with Self)

As for rates, Calipari leads the way with 61%, Pitino is at 57%, Roy Williams is at 48%, Bill Self is at 47%, and Izzo is 5th at 45%, ahead of Coach K at 42%. These numbers will chance a bit this weekend, but not by much.

Final Fours?

Izzo’s tally of 7 is tied with Pitino for 3rd in the modern era behind Coach K (12), and Roy Williams (9). Calipari can tie Izzo this year (and is likely to do so).

As for Final Four rates, Izzo is tied for second at 35%, with Coach K at 36%. Calipari, Pitino, and Williams are all at 33%.

Also of note is that Izzo has the record at 14 for the most wins as the highest seed (with Boeheim now right behind at 13). The next highest active coaches only have 7 (Beilein, Marshall, and Few).

Izzo is in the Top 6 is overall tournament winning percentage and is the only active coach with more than 10 tournament wins who is over 0.500 as the underdog.

The bottom line? Izzo is still very much an elite tournament coach, even after the last 3 years.

Someone pointed this out a few days ago, but MSU played exactly 5 games against teams that finished the regular season in the Kenpom Top 25 in defensive efficiency. We lost all 5, and won the other 30.

Jim said several weeks ago that this team was playing too much like an All Star team. I believed and hoped that they were talented enough to figure it out, but they didn't. I don't it is any more complicated than that.

As everyone knows, a 16-seed has never beaten a 1-seed. They are 132-0 all time since 1979. Based on my analysis of historical point spreads, we are getting to the point where this is a bit odd.

As an example, 1-seeds are usually about a 23-25 point favorite or so. If we take 24 as the spread, my historical data regression suggests that a 24-point favorite will win 99.2% of the time. Well, it just so happens that 0.8% of 132 is 1 game. So, in other words, we are due for the upset to beat all other upsets.

That said, Kansas is only a 15.5-point favorite over Penn, which is about the tightest spread that I can remember seeing for a 1-seed in the 1st round. Now, let's not get too crazy, as using my same math the Jayhawks still have a 94% chance of winning, but it is notable.

I would say "you heard it here first," but I have seen no fewer than 3 people on twitter talk about the possibility. One was Seth Davis, and another was Ken Pomroy, I believe. So, it is out there. I sure am not brave enough to pick this upset, but man is it tempting....

Would they be down by 10? 20? Dare I say 100?

Guilty as charged:

Two hearted

This looks like high level basketball to me. Damn. UNCG is the real deal

As we enjoy the appetizer that is the First Four, here is a little more historical data that may help you fill out your bracket. First, how about the Final Four teams themselves? How aggressive can you / should you be in picking lower seeds? If we go back to 1979, the total distribution looks like this:

where, as we can see, 40% of all Final Four participants are 1-seeds, 20% are 2-seeds, 20% are 3-seeds and 4-seeds, and the remaining 20% is something lower than that. So, odds are only 1 or 2 of the current 1-seeds will wind up in San Antonio. Another way to look at this data is the distribution of the top seed in the Final Four, the second highest seed, the 3rd highest, and the lowest. That data is shown here:

The gives you a little better idea of what to expect. In almost any given year, you can expect at least one 1-seed. The second and third highest seeds are usually 1-seeds or 2-seeds. But, in the vast majority of years (over 90%) there is a 3-seed or lower that crashes the party. One final way to look at this data is that the average top Final Four seed in a given year has a seed of 1.1, the second highest average seed is 1.7, third is 2.9, and the average lowest seed is 5.5.

Another interesting piece of data that I pulled tonight deals with at what point it is likely that each seed will get eliminated. In other words, what percentage of (say) 1-seeds actually make the (say) regional final? That data is shown in the following 2 graphs:


Based on the top graph above, the answer to my question is about 70%, as a little over 30% of the 1-seed get eliminated in the Sweet 16 or before. Also notable is that about a third of all 2-seeds don't make the Sweet 16, and about 45% of 3-seeds get bounced in the first weekend.

There is some other interesting information buried in the data as well, such as the fact that 5-seeds almost never get past the Sweet 16. Only 9 5-seeds have ever made a Regional Final and two of those teams were MSU teams that made the Final Four. Ironically, once a 5-seed makes the Regional Final, 7 of the 9 have made the Final Four, but none have ever won the Title.

Finally, I will leave the board with this tidbit. For all those of us that either are anticipating or dreading the possibility of an MSU-Duke rematch in the Sweet 16, you might be surprised to learn that the 2-3 match-up has only happened in 51 of the possible 156 cases since 1979, which suggests there is only about a 1 in 3 chance that it will happen this year, either because MSU gets upset or Duke does. If the teams do meet, history suggests that the 2-seed wins 65% of the time (33/51).

Food for thought.

I have posted this plot a few times this winter, but now that the regular season is over, the data is finally all in and we can start to draw a real conclusion. I downloaded all of the KenPom pretournament data back to 2002 and looked at the statistical profile of all 16 past champs. They ALL had the following things in common:

An adjusted offensive efficiency of at least 111.35 points per 100 possessions
An adjusted defensive efficiency of no greater than 94.95 points per 100 possessions.

Of all 68 teams in the field, only 8 teams this year meet this criteria. They are:

Virginia
Tennessee
Cincinnati
Michigan
Texas Tech
Clemson
MSU
Duke

Graphically, this relationship is shown here:


Where the green area is the championship area.

Another notable observation is that 13 of the 16 champions also finished in the Top 6 of Kenpom's final overall rankings. If we consider the teams in the current Top 6 that fall into the green region, this gives you the 4 teams most likely to win the Title this year:

Virginia
Cincinnati
MSU
Duke

I hope this is helpful as you fill out your bracket!

The committee took ASU and OK over Baylor and St. Mary's. Pretty clear early indication of value of "quality wins" vs the penalty of "bad loses". Not a good early sign for MSU

OK, after today's results and a little more thought, I have tweaked my bracket. I am going to still go for my slightly homer pick of putting MSU as a 2-seed in Detroit, and this time I even put us in the Midwest. A couple teams I vary pretty significantly from other source, but I stand by my bracketology. Without further ado, here we go:

So, I like to talk some smack about bracketology. Now, it is time to show you my cards. I usually put together my own bracket and I am a bit ahead of schedule on my own S-curve this year. It is rather late, so I am just going to drop this here with limited comment. I am sure it is not perfect, but this is my current idea.

I have been waffling back and forth, but my current answer is MSU is the 2-seed in the East, on the assumption that the committee will take a hard look at the Kenpom rankings and make a more rational decision that just the RPI might lead them to. Enjoy

First of all, everybody needs to take a step back from the ledge. Yes, it sucks to lose to Michigan. Yes, I have concerns about this team reaching its potential. Yes, it sucks to have to stew about the BTT for a week and wring our hands about seeding and placement. I get it. BUT, the season IS NOT OVER. Let’s pull back a bit from talk about who is going pro and next year’s team. We will have plenty of time to debate that in the weeks to come. It’s March, we have a HOF coach and at least 2 lottery picks. Not too many teams can say that.

Second, I am one of the biggest culprits for this, but I think we also need to chill out a bit about MSU’s seed and whether we will be playing in Detroit. This one is hard for me, but I will try. It reminds me A LOT about the whole Outback Bowl debacle a few month ago. At the end of the day, we might not get what we want (a 2-seed in Detroit or the OutHouse Bowl) but sometimes you get what you need (a good Bowl match-up or a favorable NCAA tournament draw). NO ONE can predict MSU’s next opponent or location. But, there are a few things that maybe we can discuss.

So, let’s talk about potential match-ups. The one thing that I think we can all agree upon is MSU will almost certainly be either a 2-seed or a 3-seed. At this point, I don’t see much point in talking about MSU’s possible 1st or even 2nd round match-ups. There are simply too many potential variables and possible outcomes. But, we can certainly plan on facing a 14- or 15-seed in the first round and if we win a 7/10-seed or likely a 6-seed in the second round.

If MSU is in Detroit, a team like Wright State would be quite likely due to the geography, but it is hard to say. In the 2nd round, some possible teams in this part of the S curve are Houston, TCU, Miami, Texas A&M, Arkansas, and Nevada. We will see. MSU needs to beat any team on this list to avoid the season being viewed as an absolute failure and disappointment. Harsh? Maybe, but it is hard to see it any other way. Nevada is the team on that list that would give me the most pause, and that match-up seems more likely if MSU is not in Detroit.

I think the potential Sweet 16 match-ups potentially bear a bit more discussion, for a couple of reasons. I know, this is looking ahead. Deal with it. First, since we are fairly sure MSU will be a 2 or 3-seed, it is pretty likely that MSU would face another 2-seed or 3-seed in the S16 (if MSU makes it that far), and the number of potential opponents is not that high. Second, other than Round 5 in the Final Four, the Sweet 16 round is the round Izzo has “struggled” with the most. Izzo is “only” 9-4 (69%) in that round but is at 75% or better for the other 3 non-Final Four rounds.

In the S-curve, there are 8 total teams that are either 2-seed and 3-seed. 3 of those teams are projected to be Big Ten teams (Purdue, MSU, and UofM). The bracketing principles require that those three teams be placed in different regions, so there will almost certainly not be a Big Ten rematch unless it happens in the Final Four. Two of the other 8 teams right now are projected to be UNC and Duke, teams MSU already played this year. Keep in mind also that 7 of Izzo’s 19 tournament losses have been to one of those two schools. Even though MSU already beat UNC this year, I would prefer not to see them again that early. The other potential S16 opponents (based on the current S-curve) are Cincinnati, Auburn, and Tennessee. I am not sure about you, but I would MUCH rather see one of these teams. But, considering that MSU seems to be trending more as a 3-seed than a 2-seed, and UNC/Duke are trending as a 2-seed, the potential NC-based ACC rematch in the S16 is the most likely outcome.

That said, if we consider the true S-curve, it might also give us a taste of how the bracket might be assembled. Right now, MSU is hovering in the “low 2 / high 3” part of the curve. Using the strict S-curve, this would line MSU up with the overall #1 seed, which currently is almost certainly Virginia, who will be placed in the South (Atlanta). Even if UVA were to loss in the ACC tournament, I think they still might get the overall #1 seed. In this scenario, whether MSU was the #2 seed or the #3, UNC and Duke will not be in the same region, because the committee is “required” to separate the top 2-3 teams in each conference in different regions. In this case, MSU would almost certainly be paired with either Cincinnati (who would also love to be in Atlanta, I would guess) or the SEC Champ (Auburn or Tennessee). Quite honestly, this might be the best scenario for MSU, upsets notwithstanding.

The other options are less desirable. If Villanova wins the Big East, as expected, they will be either the #1 or #2 overall seed. Based on MSU’s position on the S curve, it is also fairly likely that MSU would wind up in this region (The East Region in Boston) as a relatively weak 2 / strong 3. The bad news is that an ACC team is highly likely to wind up in this region due to the proximity to the ACC and the lack of another ACC team already placed there. If Duke does not win the ACC tournament, I could easily see them placed here. If Duke were to win the ACC tournament, it seems likely to me that they might elevate to the #1 seed in the West, and UNC would wind up in the East as the 2-seed or maybe a 3-seed if they flame out in the ACC tournament.

The other possible set of scenarios would be to consider what might happen if Kansas and/or Xavier were to lose in their conference tournaments. Xavier, especially, seems vulnerable to falling off the 1-line considering they need to go through Villanova, but Kansas would take their 8th loss if they fail to win the Big 12 tournament, and I don’t see that as 1-seed resume worthy either. (I think 7 losses is the most ever for a 1-seed.) In general, I would that this as a good sign, as I would much rather face Kansas or Xavier (as 2-seeds) in the Sweet 16 than Duke or UNC. But, Kansas and Xavier would also be great candidates to ship out West as 2-seeds, and the most likely 3-seed in the West is Michigan, based on their position as the weakest 3-seed, which will very likely wind up out West. I don’t think MSU Is likely to be in the West region unless the committee has then way higher (around 5-6) or way lower (11 or 12) on the S curve than the consensus right now.

The final possibility, of course, is that MSU winds up in the Midwest Region (Omaha) as either the 2-seed or (more likely) the 3-seed. The 1-seed here is most likely either Kansas or Xavier, which means the 2-seed will likely be either Duke or UNC. Once again, dislike.

Thoughts?

I just noticed that the Bracket Matrix website has been updated to reflect yesterday's action in the majority of the brackets that they track. MSU has slipped to the "best" 3-seed, while UofM is the weakest 3-seed. This seems in line with Lunardi's bracket this morning. But I did some initial analysis on the data set.

MSU is listed as a 2-seed in 37 of the brackets (47%)
MSU is listed as a 3-seed in 39 of the brackets (49%)
MSU is listed as a 4-seed in 4 of the brackets (7%)

UofM is listed as a 2-seed in 4 of the brackets (5%)
UofM is listed as a 3-seed in 39 of the brackets (49%)
UofM is listed as a 4-seed in 32 of the brackets (43%)

Also,

MSU and UofM have the same seed in 25 of the brackets (32%)
MSU has a better seed than UofM in 52 of the brackets (66%)
UofM has a better seed than MSU in 2 of the brackets (3%)

Considering both teams are "in the clubhouse" it seems quite unlikely that UofM will jump MSU on the S curve and "steal" the last slot in Detroit (but not impossible)

That said, it is important to looks at the other teams near MSU on the S curve. I have said before, I will say again that as long as MSU is in the Top 8 of the teams roughly east of the Mississippi, we will still be in Detroit, unless the committee breaks with precedent. Right now, MSU is right at #8 (as #4 Kansas does not count).

#6 Purdue -- MSU beat Purdue in the only meeting, finished ahead of Purdue in the regular season standings, is ranked higher in both human polls, and honestly played Michigan closer in the BTT. Could MSU actually wind up above Purdue on the Final S curve? Not likely, but possible

#7 UNC -- MSU did beat them head-to-head. If UNC flames out early in the ACC tournament with 10 total losses, MSU might just wind up ahead of them as well. Unlikely, but possible.

#8 Cincinnati -- The Bearcats were the team that in principle has knocked MSU off the 2-line. If Cinci would have lost to Wichita State this Sunday, MSU's odds to stay in Detroit would have been much, much higher. Now, it is a bit of a toss up. An early flame out in the AAC tournament would be helpful.

#9 MSU

#10 Auburn -- They will get sent to Dallas, so they don't matter

#11 Tennessee -- This is the team that poses the most risk to MSU, for two reasons. First, they are a natural fit for the Nashville pod, just as MSU is a natural fit for the Detroit pod. So, there will be a push to keep the Vols there as opposed to send Cincinnati there. Second, they are the only team still playing on the 1-4 line that can really put enough pressure on MSU from the bottom to knock us out of Detroit. Root for the Vols to make an early exit from the SEC tournament, or at the very least pray they don't beat Auburn if the play each other.

#12 Michigan -- covered above

Possible wildcards:

#16 West Virginia -- If they win the Big 12 tournament, they might be a threat, but I doubt it.
#17 Clemson -- If they win the ACC tournament, they might be a threat, but I doubt it.

So, that is how I see it. But, once again, I do not have faith in the committee to actually use rational judgement. For all I know, they have Michigan as a 2-seed in the Detroit and MSU as a 4-seed in Boise. That is unlikely, but after their initial bracket a few weeks ago, I cannot rule it out.

Here is just a stat line from this weekend's games that I found interesting. Both MSU and Purdue are elite 3-point shooting teams. Based on Kenpom's numbers, both teams shot over 40% as teams for the year, which put both teams in the Top 6 Nationally. Yet, MSU and Purdue combined to shoot only 11-43 (25.6%) against the Wolverines from 3.

Also of note is that percentage-wise Michigan's 3-pt defense is not statistically that good. It is 34%, which is ranked #129th in the country and in Big Ten play, it is 11th out of the 14 teams. With Michigan current cocky, on a hot streak, and having to sit out for 2 weeks, the phrase "regression to the mean" comes to mind.

Just a little reality check.