Convenient Treatment of Vacated Wins

Like most of you that will read this, I have been following the 2013 NCAA basketball tournament and Michigan's run to the Final Four. Congratulations to those players and best of luck next week against Syracuse and beyond.

Now that that is out of the way, let me talk about what has interested me since long before this tournament- vacated wins, particularly as a penalty for rules violations.  The theory of this penalty makes sense to me but the gray area of its application has always been confusing.  I searched high and low for a good definition of what it means to vacate a win by the NCAA's standards without any luck.  The best definition I found (by what I imagine the NCAA implies) was from Merriam-Webster: "To give up incumbency or occupancy". In other words, when a team vacates a win, they no longer occupy the position that victory provided; they have vacated it, leaving the position empty or unclaimed.

The #2 image result for the search: Michigan Basketball

The gray area I referred to is most visible in the media's treatment of vacated wins.

1. Before the  tournament, I posted a link to a rivals.com blog post that tallied the Big Ten schools' historical tournament performances.  The article counted wins and achievements of Michigan, Minnesota and Ohio State with no mention that they had been vacated due to various infractions.  
2. As CBS televised Michigan's games this weekend, the references to the school's last Final Four run(s) were unsurprisingly a main storyline complete with images of Steve Fisher hugging various players.  
3. Last night mgoblue.com, THE official website of University of Michigan athletics, posted a write-up on the current team's run that couldn't get past the first sentence without referencing the schools last Final Four.

The only reason I can see for the inconsistencies is convenience.  It makes an easy storyline to sell. It's difficult to make allowances for people ignorant of the back-story.  It's easy to say how two things are the same. It's difficult to say how they are different.  It's easy to subtract wins on paper. It's difficult to reconcile that achievements were a benefit of those vacated wins.  Just to make a point on that, with all of the references to Michigan's Final Four appearances, when do you think you'll next hear Joe Paterno referred to as the winningest college football coach?

Vacating wins is obviously something the NCAA is serious about as evidenced by its actions.  Schools obviously don't want to vacate wins as evidenced by their appeals to the punishment.  Why then does the NCAA not enforce logical reporting and treatment of vacated games by its partners (CBS) and members (UofM)?

For further reading on vacated wins I recommend:

• The Theory and Practice of Vacating Games from the NCAA's own blog
• What does vacating wins really mean? from ESPN

 

Final Breakdown: Big Ten Scenarios and Tournament Seeding

With one day of games remaining among the B1G contenders, the possibilities are starting to dwindle.  On Monday and Wednesday, I had looked at the eight most likely scenarios and the resulting conference tournament seedings.  Now with four games remaining between the front-runners, I give you the four scenarios based on the Illinois-Ohio State game and the Indiana-Michigan game assuming that Michigan State and Wisconsin hold serve against Northwestern and Penn State respectively.  Within each scenario, I show what will happen if Michigan State OR Wisconsin lose their respective game.  In the unlikely event that BOTH teams lose their games, the seedings would certainly shuffle but Wisconsin would remain outside of the top four seeds.

Sunday's Games:

12:00 UW @ PSU
12:30 UI @ OSU
4:00 IU @ UM
6:00 NU @ MSU

Scenarios:

A) Ohio State, Michigan win

1. IU
2. OSU
3. UM
4. MSU
5. UW

If MSU loses in this scenario: no seeding change but MSU loses share of conference title
If Wisconsin loses in this scenario: no change

B) Ohio State, Indiana win

1. IU
2. OSU
3. MSU
4. UW
5. UM

If MSU loses in this scenario: no change 
If Wisconsin loses in this scenario: UM gets 4-seed, UW gets 5-seed

C) Illinois, Indiana win

1. IU
2. MSU
3. UW
4. OSU
5. UM

If MSU loses in this scenario: OSU gets 3-seed, UW gets 4-seed 
If Wisconsin loses in this scenario: OSU gets 3-seed, UM gets 4-seed, UW gets 5-seed

D) Illinois, Michigan win

1. IU
2. UM
3. MSU
4. UW
5. OSU

If MSU loses in this scenario: OSU gets 4-seed, UW gets 5seed, MSU loses share of conference title
If Wisconsin loses in this scenario: OSU gets 4-seed, UW gets 5-seed

Note: Green Bolding denotes a share of the conference championship

Further Breakdown: Big Ten Scenarios and Tournament Seeding

With Ohio State's win over Indiana last night the picture for the B1G title and tournament seeding got a lot more interesting with several teams' hopes likely coming down to Sunday's match-up between Indiana and Michigan.  On Monday, I looked at scenarios based on outcomes of three games.  One of those games was the IU-OSU game so now I am looking a little deeper since I can make some stronger assumptions.  The remaining games involving teams with title (and Thursday tourney bye) hopes are:

March 6: UM @ Purdue
March 7: UW @ MSU
March 10: UW @ PSU, UI @ OSU, IU @ UM, NU @ MSU

For the scenarios, I am only considering the yellow-bolded games.  I am now including the Illinois-Ohio State game.  As I said on Monday, the other games are "handle your business" games.  Sure, anything can happen but it just opens up too many (unlikely) possibilities. So here are the eight most likely scenarios and the resulting Big Ten tournament seedings. Teams that take a piece of the conference title are green-bolded.

Scenarios:

A) Wisconsin, Illinois, Indiana win

1. IU
2. UW
3. OSU
4. MSU
5. UM

B) Wisconsin, Illinois, Michigan win

1. UW
2. IU
3. UM
4. OSU
5. MSU

C) Wisconsin, Ohio State, Michigan win

1. UW
2. UM
3. OSU
4. IU
5. MSU

D) Wisconsin, Ohio State, Indiana win

1. IU
2. UW
3. OSU
4. MSU
5. UM

E) Michigan State, Ohio State, Michigan win

1. IU
2. OSU
3. UM
4. MSU
5. UW

F) Michigan State, Ohio State, Indiana win

1. IU
2. OSU
3. MSU
4. UW
5. UM

G) Michigan State, Illinois, Indiana win

1. IU
2. MSU
3. UW
4. OSU
5. UM

H) Michigan State, Illinois, Michigan win

1. IU
2. UM
3. MSU
4. UW
5. OSU

 Bullet Points:

• Again, the Indiana-Michigan match-up will answer most questions.  An Indiana win secures them the outright title and relegates Michigan to a Thursday tournament game.  An Indiana loss opens the door to a three or four-way tie for the crown.
• I have commented on the imbalance of the schedule before.  Of the five contenders, Wisconsin benefits by playing Indiana and Michigan only once.  To their credit, they won both contests which gives them a huge advantage in tie-breaking procedures.
• For Michigan State and Michigan fans, scenarios A, D & H likely set up a tournament rematch between those teams.

Big Ten Scenarios and Tournament Seeding

The B1G hoops season has one week to go with five teams in the mix for a piece of the title and one of the top four seeds in the conference tournament.  Indiana has locked up at least a share and can win the conference outright with either a win at home against Ohio State or at Michigan.  The other four, Michigan, Michigan State, Ohio State and Wisconsin are also battling for a Thursday bye in the conference tournament as they jockey for a more favorable NCAA seeding.

In the next week, these five teams play seven games amongst themselves. Seven games means there are 128 potential possible endings (2^7) to the regular season.  The games to be played are:

March 5: OSU @ IU
March 6: UM @ Purdue
March 7: UW @ MSU
March 10: UW @ PSU, UI @ OSU, IU @ UM, NU @ MSU

128 possibilities is far too much to look at but luckily each outcome is not equally likely.  Four of the above games are "handle your business" games (they are the un-bolded games); if those teams handle their business, the league finish will get decided by three games with eight (2^3) more or less equally likely scenarios.  I know it's the B1G and handling your business is not always just that.  Should any one of the teams lose games they are expected to win they would likely drop to fifth place and lose a bye in the conference tourney.  If multiple teams fail to handle their business, well it becomes a shit-storm and you can throw this whole thing out the window.

Bullet Points:

• Today, Indiana has a better than 75% chance of winning the conference outright.  Tuesday's game against OSU will decide a lot and is arguably the least in doubt of the big three (yellow bolded) games.
• If all teams handle their business, Michigan will need to beat Indiana to avoid the 5-seed regardless of anything else. They really get stung by tie-breakers having lost their only game against Wisconsin.
• If Indiana beats OSU on Tuesday, the title is decided leaving the other teams scrapping for a tournament bye with four scenarios.  In two of those scenarios, Michigan falls to the 5-seed. In another scenario, OSU gets the 5-seed.  In the final scenario where MSU loses to Wisconsin, MSU and OSU would go deep into tie-breakers for fourth place relying on the finish of Minnesota and/or Illinois.
• If OSU and Michigan both beat Indiana, it likely creates a four-way tie and the MSU-UW game becomes very important with the winner sharing the B1G title and the loser falling to the 5-seed.  Wisconsin would also get the #1 seed with a win over MSU.

Disclaimer: This all relies on my proper interpretation of the B1G tie-break procedures which I got here.  Go State.

Good Football in Our Great State

It's been a month since I posted last and because I was posting so much on football, I wanted to do a season wrap-up now that the Spartans, Wolverines and Lions are all done playing.  My plan was to post a few links and make a few comments for each team but as I curated some reading material, it became evident that there was a lot more to be said about the Wolverines.  So just a couple links for the good guys and a bunch of links for the bad guys.  Did you think this would be unbiased?

The Lions

This season, my dad started DVR'ing the Lions games.  For me that says it all.  Before 2011 he watched exactly one half of one NFL game per year, the second and third quarters on Thanksgiving.  Just enough to make a few comments about the long-term patheticness of the team.  I saw many people join the Lion bandwagon in a big way on Facebook too... not to criticize either my FB friends or my dad.  I think it says a LOT that so many people still care, at all.

So now that the season is in the books what's next?  Some guy at ESPN says "the Lions have earned themselves big boy treatment".  Fair enough.

The Spartans

Well, it was a great season for the Spartans and their fans.  I won't go too much into it but as ESPN B1G blogger, Adam Rittenberg, points out: keeping their defensive coordinator, Pat Narduzzi, is a good indication that the program is headed where it wants to go.  Agreed.

The Wolverines

You can't argue that the Wolverines didn't have a successful year.  But as DFP columnist Michael Rosenberg points out, it was just one of those years where everything went their way. Rosenberg: For Michigan, an honorable end to lucky season

Not many people outside of Ann Arbor were too high on the Wolverines (and Hokies) selection to the Sugar Bowl.  Rittenberg says that the game diminishes the league's aspirations of being perceived as equal to the SEC.

Some dude from Fox Sports takes it a step further, calling it a fraudulent bowl game.  Another writer from CBS Sports basically says the same thing. Comparing the game to a puppy falling down the stairs.

This is the one that gets me.  All this talk of "Is Michigan Back?".  Granted, much of it is prompted by the media who think it's a great story line. And when asked if they're back, the players have little choice on how to respond... Coach Hoke finds a way to turn it on its ear a bit by saying that "Michigan never left".  But where is it that Michigan Football is back too (or never left, depending on whom you ask)?  Why not acknowledge the hard work and fortuity that lead to a surprisingly successful season and let the winning speak for itself?  It is this sense of pre-destination or responsibility or entitlement to greatness that people outside of the Michigan fold really detest.  But I guess it's also what draws many people to the program... and gets them into games like the Sugar Bowl.

Our Daily Dose of Hipocrisy

... From UofM athletic director, Dave Brandon.  He thinks OSU is getting special treatment that contradicts the NCAA's goal to create "a level playing field"...

Read the short article from ESPN, HERE.  Too lazy to click over?  Basically, Brandon is mad that Ohio State's new coach, Urban Meyer, is being allowed to recruit thus freeing up time and resources for current interim, Fickell to coach up the Xs and Os in OSU's bowl game.

Yes, Dave Brandon.  It's just another case of the NCAA trying to keep the little guys down.  When will UofM ever get a hand up from the big mean NCAA football machine?