Sign In To Your Spartans Illustrated Account
SNew to Lockerverse?
Create an accountLOCKERVERSE
LOCKERVERSE
New to Lockerverse?
Create an accountLOCKERVERSE
Which class of 2027 prospects are scheduling visits with Michigan State? Stay up to date here.
Michigan State fans will be happy to see the Big Ten announced home and away opponents for the 2026-2027 men's basketball season on Tuesday afternoon.The conference will once again play a 20-game league schedule consisting of seven home only and seven away only matchups, while three opponents will be on the Spartans' schedule both both home and away.Besides its protected annual rivalry series against Michigan, MSU will play both home and away against Maryland and Nebraska this upcoming season.The last time the Spartans faced the Terps twice in the same season, it was a sweep in 2023-24 with a 61-59 victory in College Park on Jan. 21, 2024 followed soon after with a 63-54 win in East Lansing on Feb. 3. For the Huskers, the Spartans last met twice in 2022-23 with a 74-56 win at the Breslin on Jan. 3, 2023 followed by an 80-67 win Feb. 28 at Pinnacle Bank Arena. MSU defeated UMD at home this past season but fell on the road at UNL. MSU has now dropped two straight at PBA in the series, the first of those losses snapping an 11-game win streak over UNL.Big Ten opponents to visit the Breslin Center next season include Minnesota, Oregon, Penn State, Purdue, Rutgers, Washington, and Wisconsin.The Spartans will visit Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Ohio State, UCLA, and USC.MSU finished the 2025-26 season with a 27-8 overall record, including a 15-5 mark in Big Ten play. The Spartans earned a No.4 seed in the Big Ten Tournament, falling to UCLA in its opening matchup before then earning a No. 3 seed in the NCAA Tournament, the program's 28th-straight trip to the big dance, and advancing to the Sweet 16 for the 17th time under head coach Tom Izzo.Dates, start times, and broadcast details for the 2026-27 season will be released on later dates.
On Tuesday morning, the Michigan State hockey team added another talented recruit, as they seek to get over the hump and win their first NCAA Championship since 2007, while looking to "four-peat" as Big Ten Champions.Ethan Belchetz, a 6'5" 227-pound 2008-born forward - and projected 1st round pick in the upcoming 2026 NHL Draft - announced his commitment to the Spartans.https://www.instagram.com/p/DYPgEOWEVfl/?igsh=MWt5enU1aGgwZGMzMQ==Belchetz, an Oakville, Ontario native, played last season with the Windsor Spitfires in the Ontario Hockey League, registering 34 goals and 25 assists in 57 games played. Belchetz missed the Spitfires end of the regular season and playoffs with a broken clavicle suffered in early March. Belchetz joins MSU commits defensemen Chase Reid, forward Nikita Klepov, forward Brooks Rogowski (expected Fall 2027), defensemen Tommy Bleyl (expected Fall 2027), and forward Jack Hextall as players who have all been projected in NHL mock drafts to go in the first round.These players will join forward Cullen Potter (1st round 2025), forward Cayden Lindstrom (1st round 2024), forward Ryker Lee (1st round 2025), incoming freshman forward Mason West (1st round 2025), and incoming freshman goaltender Joshua Ravensbergen (1st round 2025) as first rounders all on the same roster.Belchetz is a left hand shot, and I would slot him somewhere in the top three lines as left wing - likely first or second line - with a center like Cullen Potter or Cayden Lindstrom beside him. Here is what scouts have said about Belchetz...Corey Pronman (The Athletic):"Belchetz was once thought of as a potential top-five pick due to his massive 6-foot-5 frame, hard elements and being able to score. He didn’t have a great season, though, and scouts have concerns about his pace."Scott Wheeler (The Athletic):"Belchetz is an extremely physically advanced winger who was the No. 1 pick in the 2024 OHL draft and was 6-foot-5 and over 220 pounds as a 16-year-old last season. He got people talking when he got off to a hot start to his rookie season with the Spitfires last year, picking up two points in his debut before a four-goal, six-point night in his third OHL game. He also had a solid tournament for gold medal-winning Canada White at U17s, though I did think he was less impactful in the higher-pace semifinal and final.He played well (without dominating) on a disappointing team at Hlinka, too, imposing himself at times on the puck and making some plays through the middle. After some dominant stretches to start this season, though, his production leveled off for the second year in a row, and then he broke his clavicle in early March, ending his season with the title-chasing Spits. In my live viewings in the early fall, I thought he looked better than Flyers first-rounder Jack Nesbitt on Windsor’s top line, and there was a lot of early excitement. He had NHL clubs drooling over his hulking frame, legit skill/scoring and developing playmaking and pace then, too. But following a quiet CHL USA Prospects Challenge, he hit a bit of a wall for a long stretch before the injury, finishing his season on a bit of a downspell.The continued development of his wall game, so that he's more focused on bumping players off the puck and making a quick play off the boards, will be critical in him realizing his potential. His feet can be a little heavy out of the blocks, and his stride can look a little clunky, but he can really get around the ice and drive the middle once he gets moving. And while some of his impact is driven by his sheer size and his ability to stay over pucks and drive into spots, he also has strong offensive tools, he handles well into congested areas, he's comfortable going to his backhand and he can really shoot the puck. When he's at his best, he looks like a force out there. Think Matthew Knies if it all comes together. Someone is going to make that bet fairly early, even if most softened on where they were on him in October/November. Before the injury, he was still on pace for 41 goals."
Writing about Michigan State Athletics is weird these days. Having to read court orders and arbitration rulings and trying to figure out how they affect MSU (or how they don't) is a sign of the new world of collegiate athletics we find ourselves in.It may be a tad on the boring side, yes, but - ultimately - these issues are going to really determine who is set up to succeed in the new reality that college sports is becoming ... and who is not.The good news for Spartan fans is that the first major arbitration ruling of the post-House settlement era appears to have delivered more than a victory for the College Sports Commission (CSC). It provided much-needed clarity for schools navigating the new revenue-sharing system - and, in many ways, validated Michigan State’s measured approach.In case you weren't following along - and, honestly, good for you if you weren't - a neutral arbitrator ruled in favor of the CSC in a case involving 18 Nebraska football players whose third-party NIL deals with Playfly were rejected by the NIL Go clearinghouse.The decision affirmed a few key principles:- Multimedia-rights partners like Playfly can be treated as “associated entities” subject to heightened scrutiny- NIL agreements must have a legitimate business purpose- “Warehousing” NIL rights for undefined future use violates House settlement rulesIf all of that doesn't mean much to you, the average sports fan, that's ok. I'll try to break it down a bit and explain why it shows that MSU appears to be in a good position moving forward.The ruling directly challenged the aggressive strategies used by other universities who redirected sponsor money to expand payrolls beyond the revenue-sharing cap. It emphasized that school-connected entities cannot simply promise large future sums without actually showing how the student-athletes were going to deliver the business value part of the deal by actually using their name, image, and likeness to provide real market value to business entities.If you back up, you'll see there is a clear divide in college athletics right now: programs pushing boundaries with loosely disguised compensation versus those building sustainable, compliant structures.Michigan State, under Athletic Director J Batt, has positioned itself firmly in the latter group through its approach, including the upcoming launch of Spartan Ventures (and Spartan Media Ventures).Unlike the Nebraska model the arbiter ruled against, Michigan State is creating what appears to be legitimate long-term business infrastructure around athletics. Spartan Media Ventures will centralize and expand media, content, production, sponsorship, and commercial operations. It will focus on monetizing audience attention, fan engagement, subscriptions, branded content, live programming, and digital distribution.That might make the average football or basketball or soccer or gymnastics fan yawn, but it actually really matters in today's approach to college athletics. Why? Because modern NIL depends on real commercial ecosystems - and this ruling reinforces that.The more genuine media inventory, distribution channels, sponsor relationships, and engagement opportunities a school builds, the easier it becomes to structure defensible NIL deals tied to actual value - rather than artificial payments.The Nebraska ruling reinforced that NIL cannot function as disguised payroll routed through affiliates without real activation of the player's name, image, and likeness tied to a real business purpose. By contrast, platforms like Spartan Media Ventures can generate sponsor value, measurable impressions, content partnerships, and promotional opportunities connected directly to athletes’ name, image, and likeness - and these arrangements stand a much stronger chance under CSC scrutiny.It's important to note that Spartan Media Ventures is not replacing Michigan State’s relationship with Playfly. Instead, it creates a hybrid approach:- Playfly continues handling traditional multimedia rights, including sponsorship sales, signage, radio inventory, and event-tied assets.- Spartan Media Ventures acts as an accelerator for new opportunities in content, branding, digital distribution, athlete storytelling, subscription products, and emerging media that don’t fit neatly within traditional university structures.As I've written about before, this structure gives MSU operational flexibility that public universities often lack due to procurement rules, bureaucracy, and oversight requirements.Recent examples like the Spartans Mobile launch (in partnership with Playfly Sports and Collegiate Mobile) show how traditional and new entities can coexist productively.Spartan Ventures will serve as the revenue, innovation, and development arm for Michigan State Athletics. Its benefits will include:1. Sustainable Revenue Generation: Creates scalable income streams to support direct revenue-sharing payments and rising roster costs, reducing over-reliance on donor fundraising.2. Defensible NIL Opportunities: Ties deals to real business activity - branded content, sponsorship integrations, premium experiences, appearances, and measurable deliverables - making them far easier to defend than vague future promises.3. Operational Agility: Enables faster, more creative commercial decisions while maintaining institutional oversight and compliance.It is becoming clear that structure matters as much as financial access. Schools can no longer assume school-connected NIL mechanisms will automatically survive scrutiny simply because athletes are being paid.Michigan State’s model - focused on expanding legitimate revenue, commercializing intellectual property, deepening sponsor relationships, and generating NIL tied to genuine activity - appears well-aligned with the direction the sport is heading.As more legal challenges test the House settlement, the Nebraska decision signals that guardrails exist and are being enforced. In that environment, Michigan State’s emphasis on building real commercial infrastructure looks increasingly valuable.Perhaps we can all soon get back to writing less about this sort of stuff, and more about the athletic endeavors on the field.
The Michigan State football program will continue the tradition of beginning its season during the Friday of Labor Day weekend, as the Spartans announced that the 2026 regular-season opener against Toledo has been moved to Friday, Sept. 4 at Spartan Stadium. Kickoff time and TV network for the contest will be released at a later date. The game was originally scheduled for Saturday, Sept. 5. Meanwhile, FOX Sports announced MSU’s late-November contest against Big Ten foe Oregon has been moved to Friday, Nov. 20 as part of the FOX College Football Friday schedule. The game will begin at 8 p.m. Eastern Time and will be televised on FOX. The Nov. 20 contest between the Spartans and Ducks is the last game scheduled at Spartan Stadium for the 2026 season. This most likely means that MSU will celebrate its senior class with a senior night on that date. As for Michigan State’s game against Toledo, this will be the sixth-straight season in which MSU begins its campaign on a Friday. The last time the Spartans started on a Saturday was during the COVID-19 shortened 2020 season, which was a loss to Rutgers in head coach Mel Tucker's debut. Prior to that, Michigan State last started its season on a Saturday in 2017 with a victory over Bowling Green. Before that, the calendar goes all the way back to 2010 to find when MSU opened a campaign on a Saturday, which resulted in a win over Western Michigan. This year's contest versus Toledo will also be the fifth consecutive season in which Michigan State starts its season in East Lansing. The last time the Spartans started a season on the road was a win at Northwestern in 2021. The opposing coach during the Spartans' 2021 game against the Wildcats was of course Pat Fitzgerald, who now leads MSU in 2026. Overall, the 2026 season will be the 12th time in the past 16 years that MSU opens with a Friday night game in East Lansing. Additionally, it is the 14th time since 2011 that the Spartans begin the season on a Friday night. The Spartans have had a lot of success in season openers, as they are 11-0 in their previous home Friday night games to start the season and 13-0 overall in their Friday night season openers since 2011. This game against Toledo marks the debut for Fitzgerald as head coach of Michigan State. He has a career coaching record of 110-101 in 17 seasons as head coach, all at Northwestern, and is the winningest coach in NU program history. It will also mark the first game for Mike Jacobs at the helm of Toledo. He has a career coaching career of 94-23 between Mercer, Lenoir-Rhyne and Notre Dame College (Ohio).The 2026 matchup is just the second all-time meeting between Michigan State and Toledo, and the first in nearly 101 years. The Spartans defeated the Rockets by a final score of 58-0 way back on Nov. 8, 1925 in East Lansing. While there is a new regime in 2026 at both MSU and Toledo, there is some familiarity between the programs in this year's matchup. Current Michigan State general manager Bryan Gasser spent eight total seasons with the Rockets, including as a graduate assistant coach in 2010 and 2012, as director of high school relations in 2013, as tight ends coach and special teams coordinator in 2014 and 2015, as director of player personnel/recruiting coordinator in 2023 and 2024, and as general manager of player personnel in 2025. Additionally, Michigan State brought in Toledo transfer defensive tackle Carlos Hazelwood for the 2026 season, while former Spartan safety and fan favorite Armorion Smith is now playing for the Rockets. As for the series with Oregon, the Ducks lead by an all-time tally of 5-3. Oregon’s most recent win came in 2024 by a final score of 31-10 in Eugene. It was the first matchup between the two programs as Big Ten opponents. The Nov. 20 contest this coming fall will mark the first time the Ducks come to East Lansing since 2015. On Sept. 12, 2025 in a top-10 ranked matchup, No. 5 Michigan State defeated No. 7 Oregon by a final score of 31-28. MSU is undefeated against Oregon at home with a record of 3-0. Oregon is led by head coach Dan Lanning. In other recent non-conference scheduling news, Michigan State will play Notre Dame this coming season in primetime in South Bend at 7:30 p.m. Eastern Time on Sept. 19. MSU also announced a 2027 matchup with FCS opponent Duquesne, and home-and-home series with Oklahoma State in 2028 and 2029 and Cincinnati in 2030 and 2031.
As the Pat Fitzgerald era of Michigan State football is just getting off the ground, the Spartans’ future non-conference schedule is starting to take shape. The latest additions to the schedule signal a noticeable effort to play nationally recognizable opponents, and include road tests both within and outside the Midwest.On Thursday, Michigan State football announced future home-and-home series with the Oklahoma State Cowboys and Cincinnati Bearcats, while also adding the Duquesne Dukes (FCS) to its 2027 schedule.The Spartans also finalized kickoff details for their marquee 2026 matchup against Notre Dame. The Spartans and Fighting Irish will meet in primetime on Sept. 19 in South Bend, with kickoff set for 7:30 p.m. Eastern Time on NBC and Peacock. The rivalry remains one of college football’s most historic, with the programs meeting 79 times dating back to 1897. The 2026 season also marks the 60th anniversary of the famed 10-10 “Game of the Century” tie between No. 1 Notre Dame and No. 2 Michigan State in 1966.More recently, the rivalry has produced road victories for both programs, including Michigan State’s 36-28 win in South Bend in 2016 and Notre Dame’s 38-18 win in East Lansing in 2017. However, the 2017 matchup was the last time these two programs met. With the schools scheduled to meet this coming fall and then again in East Lansing in 2027, the rivalry appears positioned to regain some of the consistency and national relevance that defined it for decades. Notre Dame leads Michigan State in the all-time series by a tally of 49-29-1. MSU will travel to Stillwater on Sept. 16, 2028, for the first meeting in program history against Oklahoma State. The Spartans return the favor by hosting the Cowboys in East Lansing on Sept. 15, 2029. Michigan State will then begin a two-year series with Cincinnati, traveling to Nippert Stadium on Sept. 14, 2030, before welcoming the Bearcats to Spartan Stadium in 2031.For a Michigan State program attempting to re-establish itself nationally under Fitzgerald, the scheduling philosophy is notable. Rather than filling future non-conference slates exclusively with regional Group of Five or FCS opponents, the Spartans are adding games against current Big 12 programs with recent histories of national relevance, while also renewing the rivalry going against Notre Dame in 2026 and 2027.Oklahoma State, in particular, presents one of the more intriguing additions. The Cowboys have long been one of the Big 12’s more stable programs, producing multiple double-digit win seasons under longtime head coach Mike Gundy. However, Gundy was fired early during the 2025 season, and the Cowboys have won just four combined games during the 2024 and 2025 seasons combined. Eric Morris takes over as head coach of the Cowboys in 2026. While the two schools have never met on the football field, the matchup carries some stylistic intrigue. Oklahoma State has traditionally leaned into explosive offenses and high-tempo play, while Fitzgerald’s reputation was built around physical line play and offensive efficiency during his tenure at Northwestern.The road trip to Stillwater could also become one of the more challenging non-conference environments Michigan State has played in recent years. Boone Pickens Stadium has consistently been viewed as one of the tougher venues in the Big 12, particularly for teams unfamiliar with the setting.The Cincinnati series offers a different type of intrigue.Although the programs have technically met twice before, the last matchup came in 1946 — nearly 85 years before the scheduled 2030 meeting. Michigan State won the first game 32-0 in 1930 before Cincinnati answered with an 18-7 victory in East Lansing 16 years later.At the time those games were played, neither program remotely resembled what they are today. Cincinnati has since emerged as one of the more successful Group of Five-to-Power Conference success stories in college football. The Bearcats reached the College Football Playoff during the 2021 season under Luke Fickell before later transitioning into the Big 12.For Michigan State, the Cincinnati series also continues a growing trend of building a relevant presence in Ohio. A trip to Cincinnati places the Spartans in another talent-rich region that has historically produced Big Ten-caliber recruits for MSU. The addition of Duquesne in 2027 is more straightforward, giving Michigan State a traditional FCS matchup to balance a difficult schedule that already includes non-conference games against Notre Dame and the Central Michigan Chippewas.That 2027 slate could quietly become one of the tougher schedules Michigan State has faced in years. In addition to Notre Dame, the Spartans are scheduled to host Michigan and Wisconsin, while traveling to Ohio State, Penn State and Washington in Big Ten play.The broader scheduling outlook also reflects the realities of the expanded Big Ten Conference. With the additions of USC, Oregon, Washington and UCLA, conference schedules have already become significantly more difficult week-to-week. Programs across the league have responded differently, some softening future non-conference schedules, others continuing to pursue marquee matchups.Michigan State appears to be trying to strike a middle ground.The Spartans are still maintaining annual in-state games against Central Michigan and Western Michigan, but the additions of Oklahoma State, Cincinnati, Notre Dame and at BYU (2032) show a willingness to test themselves against recognizable national brands.Whether that approach ultimately helps Michigan State in the expanded playoff era remains to be seen, but it does create future schedules that should generate significantly more interest among fans than the traditional buy-game model.
Michigan State fans will be happy to see the Big Ten announced home and away opponents for the 2026-2027 men's basketball season on Tuesday afternoon.The conference will once again play a 20-game league schedule consisting of seven home only and seven away only matchups, while three opponents will be on the Spartans' schedule both both home and away.Besides its protected annual rivalry series against Michigan, MSU will play both home and away against Maryland and Nebraska this upcoming season.The last time the Spartans faced the Terps twice in the same season, it was a sweep in 2023-24 with a 61-59 victory in College Park on Jan. 21, 2024 followed soon after with a 63-54 win in East Lansing on Feb. 3. For the Huskers, the Spartans last met twice in 2022-23 with a 74-56 win at the Breslin on Jan. 3, 2023 followed by an 80-67 win Feb. 28 at Pinnacle Bank Arena. MSU defeated UMD at home this past season but fell on the road at UNL. MSU has now dropped two straight at PBA in the series, the first of those losses snapping an 11-game win streak over UNL.Big Ten opponents to visit the Breslin Center next season include Minnesota, Oregon, Penn State, Purdue, Rutgers, Washington, and Wisconsin.The Spartans will visit Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Ohio State, UCLA, and USC.MSU finished the 2025-26 season with a 27-8 overall record, including a 15-5 mark in Big Ten play. The Spartans earned a No.4 seed in the Big Ten Tournament, falling to UCLA in its opening matchup before then earning a No. 3 seed in the NCAA Tournament, the program's 28th-straight trip to the big dance, and advancing to the Sweet 16 for the 17th time under head coach Tom Izzo.Dates, start times, and broadcast details for the 2026-27 season will be released on later dates.
Writing about Michigan State Athletics is weird these days. Having to read court orders and arbitration rulings and trying to figure out how they affect MSU (or how they don't) is a sign of the new world of collegiate athletics we find ourselves in.It may be a tad on the boring side, yes, but - ultimately - these issues are going to really determine who is set up to succeed in the new reality that college sports is becoming ... and who is not.The good news for Spartan fans is that the first major arbitration ruling of the post-House settlement era appears to have delivered more than a victory for the College Sports Commission (CSC). It provided much-needed clarity for schools navigating the new revenue-sharing system - and, in many ways, validated Michigan State’s measured approach.In case you weren't following along - and, honestly, good for you if you weren't - a neutral arbitrator ruled in favor of the CSC in a case involving 18 Nebraska football players whose third-party NIL deals with Playfly were rejected by the NIL Go clearinghouse.The decision affirmed a few key principles:- Multimedia-rights partners like Playfly can be treated as “associated entities” subject to heightened scrutiny- NIL agreements must have a legitimate business purpose- “Warehousing” NIL rights for undefined future use violates House settlement rulesIf all of that doesn't mean much to you, the average sports fan, that's ok. I'll try to break it down a bit and explain why it shows that MSU appears to be in a good position moving forward.The ruling directly challenged the aggressive strategies used by other universities who redirected sponsor money to expand payrolls beyond the revenue-sharing cap. It emphasized that school-connected entities cannot simply promise large future sums without actually showing how the student-athletes were going to deliver the business value part of the deal by actually using their name, image, and likeness to provide real market value to business entities.If you back up, you'll see there is a clear divide in college athletics right now: programs pushing boundaries with loosely disguised compensation versus those building sustainable, compliant structures.Michigan State, under Athletic Director J Batt, has positioned itself firmly in the latter group through its approach, including the upcoming launch of Spartan Ventures (and Spartan Media Ventures).Unlike the Nebraska model the arbiter ruled against, Michigan State is creating what appears to be legitimate long-term business infrastructure around athletics. Spartan Media Ventures will centralize and expand media, content, production, sponsorship, and commercial operations. It will focus on monetizing audience attention, fan engagement, subscriptions, branded content, live programming, and digital distribution.That might make the average football or basketball or soccer or gymnastics fan yawn, but it actually really matters in today's approach to college athletics. Why? Because modern NIL depends on real commercial ecosystems - and this ruling reinforces that.The more genuine media inventory, distribution channels, sponsor relationships, and engagement opportunities a school builds, the easier it becomes to structure defensible NIL deals tied to actual value - rather than artificial payments.The Nebraska ruling reinforced that NIL cannot function as disguised payroll routed through affiliates without real activation of the player's name, image, and likeness tied to a real business purpose. By contrast, platforms like Spartan Media Ventures can generate sponsor value, measurable impressions, content partnerships, and promotional opportunities connected directly to athletes’ name, image, and likeness - and these arrangements stand a much stronger chance under CSC scrutiny.It's important to note that Spartan Media Ventures is not replacing Michigan State’s relationship with Playfly. Instead, it creates a hybrid approach:- Playfly continues handling traditional multimedia rights, including sponsorship sales, signage, radio inventory, and event-tied assets.- Spartan Media Ventures acts as an accelerator for new opportunities in content, branding, digital distribution, athlete storytelling, subscription products, and emerging media that don’t fit neatly within traditional university structures.As I've written about before, this structure gives MSU operational flexibility that public universities often lack due to procurement rules, bureaucracy, and oversight requirements.Recent examples like the Spartans Mobile launch (in partnership with Playfly Sports and Collegiate Mobile) show how traditional and new entities can coexist productively.Spartan Ventures will serve as the revenue, innovation, and development arm for Michigan State Athletics. Its benefits will include:1. Sustainable Revenue Generation: Creates scalable income streams to support direct revenue-sharing payments and rising roster costs, reducing over-reliance on donor fundraising.2. Defensible NIL Opportunities: Ties deals to real business activity - branded content, sponsorship integrations, premium experiences, appearances, and measurable deliverables - making them far easier to defend than vague future promises.3. Operational Agility: Enables faster, more creative commercial decisions while maintaining institutional oversight and compliance.It is becoming clear that structure matters as much as financial access. Schools can no longer assume school-connected NIL mechanisms will automatically survive scrutiny simply because athletes are being paid.Michigan State’s model - focused on expanding legitimate revenue, commercializing intellectual property, deepening sponsor relationships, and generating NIL tied to genuine activity - appears well-aligned with the direction the sport is heading.As more legal challenges test the House settlement, the Nebraska decision signals that guardrails exist and are being enforced. In that environment, Michigan State’s emphasis on building real commercial infrastructure looks increasingly valuable.Perhaps we can all soon get back to writing less about this sort of stuff, and more about the athletic endeavors on the field.
MSU's new wireless venture introduces predictable, scalable revenue tied to everyday fan behavior
On Tuesday morning, the Michigan State hockey team added another talented recruit, as they seek to get over the hump and win their first NCAA Championship since 2007, while looking to "four-peat" as Big Ten Champions.Ethan Belchetz, a 6'5" 227-pound 2008-born forward - and projected 1st round pick in the upcoming 2026 NHL Draft - announced his commitment to the Spartans.https://www.instagram.com/p/DYPgEOWEVfl/?igsh=MWt5enU1aGgwZGMzMQ==Belchetz, an Oakville, Ontario native, played last season with the Windsor Spitfires in the Ontario Hockey League, registering 34 goals and 25 assists in 57 games played. Belchetz missed the Spitfires end of the regular season and playoffs with a broken clavicle suffered in early March. Belchetz joins MSU commits defensemen Chase Reid, forward Nikita Klepov, forward Brooks Rogowski (expected Fall 2027), defensemen Tommy Bleyl (expected Fall 2027), and forward Jack Hextall as players who have all been projected in NHL mock drafts to go in the first round.These players will join forward Cullen Potter (1st round 2025), forward Cayden Lindstrom (1st round 2024), forward Ryker Lee (1st round 2025), incoming freshman forward Mason West (1st round 2025), and incoming freshman goaltender Joshua Ravensbergen (1st round 2025) as first rounders all on the same roster.Belchetz is a left hand shot, and I would slot him somewhere in the top three lines as left wing - likely first or second line - with a center like Cullen Potter or Cayden Lindstrom beside him. Here is what scouts have said about Belchetz...Corey Pronman (The Athletic):"Belchetz was once thought of as a potential top-five pick due to his massive 6-foot-5 frame, hard elements and being able to score. He didn’t have a great season, though, and scouts have concerns about his pace."Scott Wheeler (The Athletic):"Belchetz is an extremely physically advanced winger who was the No. 1 pick in the 2024 OHL draft and was 6-foot-5 and over 220 pounds as a 16-year-old last season. He got people talking when he got off to a hot start to his rookie season with the Spitfires last year, picking up two points in his debut before a four-goal, six-point night in his third OHL game. He also had a solid tournament for gold medal-winning Canada White at U17s, though I did think he was less impactful in the higher-pace semifinal and final.He played well (without dominating) on a disappointing team at Hlinka, too, imposing himself at times on the puck and making some plays through the middle. After some dominant stretches to start this season, though, his production leveled off for the second year in a row, and then he broke his clavicle in early March, ending his season with the title-chasing Spits. In my live viewings in the early fall, I thought he looked better than Flyers first-rounder Jack Nesbitt on Windsor’s top line, and there was a lot of early excitement. He had NHL clubs drooling over his hulking frame, legit skill/scoring and developing playmaking and pace then, too. But following a quiet CHL USA Prospects Challenge, he hit a bit of a wall for a long stretch before the injury, finishing his season on a bit of a downspell.The continued development of his wall game, so that he's more focused on bumping players off the puck and making a quick play off the boards, will be critical in him realizing his potential. His feet can be a little heavy out of the blocks, and his stride can look a little clunky, but he can really get around the ice and drive the middle once he gets moving. And while some of his impact is driven by his sheer size and his ability to stay over pucks and drive into spots, he also has strong offensive tools, he handles well into congested areas, he's comfortable going to his backhand and he can really shoot the puck. When he's at his best, he looks like a force out there. Think Matthew Knies if it all comes together. Someone is going to make that bet fairly early, even if most softened on where they were on him in October/November. Before the injury, he was still on pace for 41 goals."
There's been a boat load of news from the Michigan State hockey program since its season ended
The Spartan hockey team looks to get over the hump in the NCAA Tournament
Which class of 2027 prospects are scheduling visits with Michigan State? Stay up to date here.
Michigan State continues to find success on the recruiting trail in the early stages of head coach Pat Fitzgerald's tenure, as class of 2027 three-star Ohio EDGE/defensive end Jack Schuler announced his commitment to the Spartans on Thursday. Schuler's commitment comes on the heels of a visit from MSU defensive coordinator Joe Rossi and defensive line coach Winston DeLattiboudere III in Ohio on Wednesday. Following the conversation between the parties, Schuler was ready to pledge to the Spartans. Michigan State offered Schuler a scholarship opportunity in February. He quickly made the the roughly four-hour trek from Columbus, Ohio to East Lansing, Michigan for a spring visit on March 21. It won't be long before Schuler returns to MSU's campus as well, as he has an official visit booked with the Spartans for the weekend of June 5 through June 7.According to the 247Sports Composite rankings, Schuler currently ranks as No. 1,034 recruit overall, No. 79 EDGE prospect and No. 39 player in the state of Ohio in the 2027 class. Looking at the Industry rankings at On3/Rivals, Schuler ranks as the No. 2,014 prospect overall, No. 180 EDGE and No. 112 player in the Buckeye State.In addition to Michigan State, Schuler has garnered scholarship offers from Connecticut, Marshall, Liberty, Central Michigan, Toledo, Ball State, Miami (OH) and Kent State.Schuler currently attends Bishop Watterson High School in Columbus, Ohio. As a junior in 2025, he helped lead the Eagles to a perfect 14-0 record and a second consecutive state championship. Schuler recorded 84 total tackles, 20 tackles for loss and nine sacks this past fall. He earned first-team All-District accolades, and was an All-State honorable mention selection. In 2024 as a sophomore, Schuler was a part of a Bishop Watterson team that went 16-0 and also won a state title. The 6-foot-5, 240-pound Schuler has some positional versatility as a strong-side defensive end or a stand-up rush end, and he could potentially play either spot once he arrives at MSU. At Michigan State, Schuler will play under Fitzgerald, Rossi, DeLattiboudere, rush ends coach Andrew Bindelglass, assistant defensive line coach Jake Chaney and the rest of the staff. With Schuler now joining the group, Michigan State's 2027 recruiting class has grown to seven total commitments as of press time, which is before official visits begin. He joins four-star defensive end Ohimai Ozolua, three-star safety Ty'ire Clark, three-star offensive tackle Jack Carlson, three-star quarterback Eli Stumpf, three-star offensive lineman Grant Adloff and three-star running back Savior Owens.
Michigan State earned a big victory on the recruiting trail on Saturday, as highly-coveted 2027 Chicago four-star defensive lineman Ohimai Ozolua announced his commitment to the Spartans on Friday. Ozolua took two consecutive visits to East Lansing earlier this spring, as he was on campus during the weekends of March 28 and April 4. He also visited MSU in January, shortly after earning a scholarship offer from the Spartans. Ozolua also has an official visit scheduled with Michigan State for the weekend of May 29 through May 31.Once he arrives at Michigan State, Ozolua will learn under head coach Pat Fitzgerald, defensive coordinator Joe Rossi, defensive line coach Winston DeLattiboudere III and the rest of the staff. MSU made it clear to the St. Rita of Cascia High School athlete that he was a top priority in the defensive trenches.“The staff and players there treat me like family,” Ozolua told Spartans Illustrated about his decision to commit to Michigan State.According to the 247Sports Composite rankings, Ozolua ranks as the No. 407 prospect nationally, No. 49 defensive lineman and No. 15 recruit in Illinois in the 2027 class. Meanwhile, the Rivals/On3 Industry rankings list Ozolua as the No. 411 overall prospect, No. 43 defensive lineman and No. 16 player in his home state. Ozolua now becomes Michigan State's highest-rated 2027 commit, and the first four-star prospect in its class. Many other programs pursued Ozolua. He has received scholarship offers from Michigan, Ohio State, Miami (FL.), Penn State, Tennessee, Illinois, Iowa, Nebraska, Missouri, Minnesota, Purdue, Wisconsin, Vanderbilt, Kansas State, Boston College and Toledo.Ozolua released a list of five finalists on March 29, which included Michigan State, Ohio State, Michigan, Tennessee and Wisconsin.He took a visit to Madison earlier this week to see the Badgers, but ultimately, Ozolua has decided to become a future Spartan. Ozolua previously told Spartans Illustrated that he was planning to take an official visit to Michigan as well. That trip to Ann Arbor will no longer take place, however, as Ozolua does not plan to visit any other schools. At the college level, Ozolua most likely projects as a strong-side defensive end, but he can be moved around. He will likely play many reps as a five-technique, but has the versatility to play in the interior of the defensive line in certain situations as well. He is considered to have a high ceiling, as Ozolua is still new to football. He played his junior season at Romeoville High School in Illinois, which was his first year of playing football in his life. He will play his senior season at St. Rita of Cascia in Chicago.Prior to playing football, the 6-foot-5, 245-pound Ozolua focused on playing basketball. He also excels in the classroom with a 3.8 grade point average. With Ozolua adding to the group, Michigan State's 2027 recruiting class has reached six total commitments as of now. He is the first defensive lineman, and second player on the defensive side of the ball, to pledge to the Spartans. Ozolua joins three-star safety Ty'ire Clark, three-star offensive tackle Jack Carlson, three-star quarterback Eli Stumpf, three-star offensive lineman Grant Adloff and three-star running back Savior Owens.
In the first two parts of this series we have taken a look at Michigan State head coach Tom Izzo's accomplishments in the Big Ten and in key March Madness performance measures such as total wins, Sweet 16s, Final Fours, wins as the lower seed, and wins on a two-day prep.The data presented clearly demonstrates Izzo's historical dominance. But as mentioned previously, not all NCAA Tournament paths are created equally. Fortunately, there are more advanced ways to level the playing field by looking at metrics that measure performance compared to expectation.In total, there are five performance-versus-expectation metrics that I tabulate for the NCAA Tournament. Two of these metrics are commonly used by others, two of them I created myself, and one is a simple accounting stat. PASE (performance against seed expectation):PASE is the "original" advanced NCAA Tournament metric. It measures the number of wins for each coach or team relative to the historical total number of wins per tournament for teams with a given seed. For example, No. 1 seeds have historically won 3.34 games per tournament since 1985. In order for a No. 1 seed to overachieve with a positive PASE score, they need to win four games and advance at least to the Final Four.PARIS (performance against round-independent seed):PARIS is a metric that I created that measures almost the same thing as PASE. The difference is that I consider the historical win percentage for each seed in each round separately and not for the tournament as a whole. PAD (performance against exact seed differential):PAD is a variation on PARIS that I created which takes into account the seed of the opponent for each tournament game. For example, playing a No. 15 seed in the second round is quite a bit easier than facing a No. 2 seed. PAD accounts for this difference, while PASE and PARIS do not.PAKE (performance against Kenpom expectation):PAKE is the other commonly-used metric that is similar to my PAD metric. PAKE accounts for the true strength of each opponent in each tournament game, regardless of seed, based on Kenpom efficiencies. However, reliable Kenpom data - and therefore this metric - only goes back in time as far as 2002.Chalk (+/-)This is a simple accounting stat that measures the total number of games won by a coach or team relative to the situation where the higher seeds win all tournament games up to the Final Four rounds. Chalk and PASE give similar information.In order to get a sense of the range and distribution of the PASE metric, Figure 1 gives the current PASE score for all 720 coaches who have appeared in an NCAA Tournament game since 1979 sorted from high to low.Figure 1: PASE metric for all NCAA Tournament coaches from 1979 through 2026The values range from +17.10 down to -8.58. Moreover, note that the highest data point are the far left of the figure sticks up considerably farther than even the second place coach.That data point at the far left belongs to Tom Izzo.Izzo's current PASE value of +17.10 is a full 4.54 points ahead of the coach in second place (Louisville legend Denny Crum) and 5.57 points ahead of Rick Pitino (who has coached at Providence, Kentucky, Louisville, and Saint John's) the active coach with the next highest score.Izzo's current score is not only the top score of 2026. It is also the highest score recorded by any coach at any point in the history of the NCAA Tournament. Duke legend Mike Krzyewski had a PASE of +16.05 following his National Championship in 2001 but retired after the 2022 season with a PASE of +11.63. Crum maxed out in 1998 with a PASE of +14.33. Pitino's PASE has been as high as +13.68 after the 2015 season. John Calipari reached a maximum of +11.49 in 2019 and Roy Williams was at +11.29 after winning a title in 2017. Billy Donovan had a PASE of +10.58 in 2014 before moving on to the NBA.Villanova legend Rollie Massimino has a PASE of +10.76 in 1989 and John Beilein had his PASE as high as +10.87 in 2018. Former Michigan coach Steve Fisher had a PASE of +10.09 in 1994 with a team full of ineligible players. No other coach in history has topped a PASE of +10 at any point in their career.The story is the same for most of the other metrics. Tom Izzo also owns the all-time best score in my PARIS metric (+9.89), PAD metric (+9.86) as well as the Chalk metric (+14). The only other coach in history with a double-digit Chalk score is Massimino (+12). The next highest active coaches are UConn's Danny Hurley and Oregon's Dana Altman with +7.The only metric where Izzo does not currently own first place is the PAKE metric. Izzo's PAKE of +5.83 is currently third place behind Syracuse's Jim Boeheim (+6.79) and Roy Williams (+6.26). The next highest active coach is Hurley at +5.01.But keep in mind that my tabulated PAKE only goes back to 2002. So even when Izzo's national title and first three Final Fours are not considered, he is still in the top three all time for performance relative to Kenpom efficiency.Beyond simply the raw numbers, the metrics can be compared in unique ways. For example, the PARIS and PAD metrics have certain mathematical properties which allow us to extract some additional interesting information. Specifically, the PARIS metric compares performance per round to the historically average performance for every team of the same seed in that round. The PAD metric is very similar, but it references the specific seed of each opponent and is therefore a more accurate measure of the true difficultly of each tournament gameBecause of this difference, when each team's PAD score is subtracted from its PARIS score, the value represents the amount of "luck" that a team or coach has had in the opponents that they have faced relative to average. Positive luck means that coach has drawn an easier than average set of tournament paths. This effect is best shown below in Figure 2.Figure 2: Comparison of NCAA Tournament luck (as measured by the difference between PARIS and PAD) and true NCAA tournament performance relative to expectation (PAD).Figure 2 compares the "luck score" (PAD subtracted from PARIS) to the PAD metric, which is indicative of the "true" performance versus expectation in NCAA Tournament play. Figure 1 includes data from all 720 head coaches who have appeared on the sidelines of at least one NCAA Tournament game. The vast majority of these data points are clustered near the origin. However, several notable coaches appear in the area outside of this middle region. Each coach's position on the graph gives information about the relative impact of "luck" on their tournament performance relative to expectation.The upper right-hand corner of the graph highlights coaches with both positive PAD and luck. In other words, on average, these coaches have been both lucky and good. Most notable in this section of the graph are Krzyzewski, Beilein, Boeheim, UConn's Jim Calhoun, Dusty May and the all-time king of NCAA Tournament luck, former Florida coach Bill Donovan. Donovan's example helps to illustrate the meaning of the luck metric. A No. 15 seed has defeated a No. 2 seed in the first round a total of 11 times in Tournament history. Naturally, this upset will usually favor the remaining teams in that half of the bracket, as the nominally "strong" No. 2 seed has been eliminated. While at Florida, Billy Donovan benefited from this type of upset of a No.2 seed in both the 2012 tournament (as a No. 7 seed) and in the 2013 tournament (as a No. 3 seed).While Donovan certainly enjoyed a lot of tournament success, his performance relative to expectation was certainly padded later in his career due to some fortunate upsets in his part of the bracket. Similarly, Krzyewski, Beilein, and Boeheim have been similarly "lucky" compared to the average NCAA Tournament coach. The lower right-hand corner of the graph is home to coaches who have been successful relative to expectation despite some below-average tournament luck. The notable coaches here are Roy Williams, Maryland's Gary Williams, Sean Miller, Rick Majerus, Chris Beard and Rollie Massimino.Tom Izzo's position in Figure 2 is relatively unique. Not only is his PAD score significantly larger than any other coach in history, Izzo also accomplished accomplished this feat with historically average luck.Figure 2 also identifies the most unlucky coach as all time, Arizona's Lute Olson. He had his share of big wins and terrible losses, but in a total of 73 tournament games, Olson only faced six opponents which were more than one seed line below the "chalk" value for that round. By comparison, Donovan faced 15 opponents more than one seed line below the "chalk" value in just 47 NCAA Tournament games. Dusty May already has three such opponents in just 15 total games.The upper left-hand side of the figure displays coaches who have had below average performance relative to expectation, but who have been a bit lucky with their tournament draws. The notable coaches here are Bob Huggins and Bill Self.Figure 2 also highlights some of the biggest underachievers in tournament history on the far left side of the graph. Virginia's Tony Bennett has the third lowest PAD (-4.22) and second lowest PASE (-8.50) on record, but he was slightly lucky on balance.Rick Barnes (PAD of -4.81), Gene Keady (-4.21), and Jamie Dixon (-3.35) are the other notable coaches who historically bring up the rear in tournament performance relative to expectation.For the final comparison for today, Figure 3 compares the PAKE metric to the PAD metric, as calculated since 2002.Figure 3: Comparison of the PAKE metric to the PAD metric since 2002 for all NCAA Tournament coaches.As expected, these two metrics are closely correlated. Both metrics are attempting to measure the number of actual wins compared to the number of expected tournament wins.PAKE measures expected tournament wins based on the victory probability derived from Kenpom efficiency data (which correlates very strongly to Las Vegas betting lines). The seeds of the teams do not factor in at all. This is likely the most accurate way to measure performance versus expectation, but the data set is limited.PAD measures expected tournament wins based on the historical data correlating win probability to the combinations of seeds playing in each game. In a perfect world - where seeding is an accurate reflection of teams' strength - PAD and PAKE would be perfected correlated.Most of the data points in Figure 3 fall on or near the trendline. What is interesting about Figure 3 are the coaches whose data deviates noticeably from that line. Izzo, for example, has a higher PAD score than his PAKE score. Mark Few and Bo Ryan similarly appear above the trendline in Figure 3, while Boeheim, Roy Williams, and Self all fall below the line.I interpret this deviation as related to the accuracy of the seeding by the NCAA Tournament Selection Committee. If a coach has a lower PAD than PAKE (below the line in Figure 3), that implies that a coach has fewer expected wins than is implied based on the seed combinations. This suggests that a coach, historically, has been given a higher seed than they deserve. Boeheim, Roy Williams, and Self are the notable coaches in this part of the figure.The opposite is also true. If a coach has a higher PAD than PAKE (above the line) that coach's team, on average, has been better than their seeds imply (and/or their opponents have, on average, been worse). In other words, on average, that coach has been historically under-seeded. Coaches Izzo, Few, and Ryan fall into this category. In part this helps explain how Izzo was able to overachieve so frequently. More often than not, his Spartan teams have been given too low of a seed. According to Figure 3, the difference between Izzo's PAD and PAKE is roughly 2.0. However, as Figure 2 shows, Izzo's PAD is well over 2.0 points ahead of the coach with the next highest value. Even if this potential correction is taken into account, Tom Izzo is still the best NCAA Tournament coach of all time, and he isn't done yet.PREVIOUS: PART ONEPREVIOUS: PART TWO
In Part One of this three-part series, we reviewed some of Michigan State head basketball coach Tom Izzo's many records and accolades in the Big Ten. In addition, we counted up and summarized his win totals and accomplishments in each round of the NCAA Tournament.While the raw numbers are impressive, they only tell a part of the story. Not all NCAA Tournament paths are the same. It is significantly easier to advance in the tournament as a high seed and harder as a lower seed.Izzo has shown that he can do both.Another record that he currently holds is the total number of tournament wins as the lower seed (17). The only other coaches in history with more than 10 "seed upset wins" are former Syracuse coach Jim Boeheim (15), Arizona's Lute Olson (11), and Villanova legend Rollie Massimino (11). The active coach with the next highest number of upset wins is Gonzaga's Mark Few with nine.To put this into perspective, Izzo has as many or more upset wins in the NCAA Tournament than several other legendary coaches have total tournament games played as the lower seed. This includes Duke's Mike Krzyewski (12 total games as the underdog out of 132 total games), Roy Williams (15), Rick Pitino (17), John Calipari (17), Bill Self (9), Florida's Billy Donovan (9), North Carolina's Dean Smith (8), just to name a few.Figure 1 below visualizes this performance by plotting the winning percentages for roughly the top 50 NCAA Tournament coaches of all time. This group loosely contains all coaches with at least 20 tournament wins in the modern era, or active coaches with at least 10 wins.The x-axis shows the winning percentage for each coach as the seed favorite. The y-axis shows the winning percentage for each coach as the underdog. The numbers in parentheses give the total number of tournament games each coach has played as either the favorite or the underdog.Figure 1: Winning percentages for the top 56 all-time NCAA tournament coaches divided up by wins as the favorite (x-axis) and as the underdog (y-axis). The numbers in parentheses give the total number of tournament games each coach has played as either the favorite or the underdog.The green square in Figure 1 maps out the area where Izzo has a better win percentage both as the favorite and as the underdog. Only 14 total coaches fall outside of this area.There are only eight total coaches in this group that have a better win percentage as the favorite than Izzo and only four have played more than eight games as the higher seed. Izzo has coached in 52 games as the higher seed.The four coaches with that higher volume are UConn's Boddy Hurley (16-2 as the favorite), Louisville legend Denny Crum (28-4), Utah and St. Louis' Rick Majerus (14-2), and former West Virginia and Michigan coach John Beilein (17-3). These coaches all edge Tom Izzo's 44-8 record and 84.6% win percentage as a favorite.Note that Chris Beard (7-0), Brad Stevens (6-0), Massimino (7-0) are all undefeated as the higher seed, but on fairly low volume. Dusty May's 7-1 record as the favorite is also notable.There are a total of eight coaches in this group with a higher win percentage than Izzo as the underdog. Only three of them have more than 10 games as the lower seed. This list includes former Florida State coach Lennard Hamilton (6-5), former Xavier and Louisville coach Chris Mack (5-4), former Miami coach Jim Laranaga (9-8), former Ohio State coach Thad Matta (5-4), Donovan (6-3), and former Kansas and SMU coach Larry Brown (7-3).May (4-2) and Massimino (11-9) are the only coaches on this list with a better win percentage than Izzo as both the higher and lower seed.Izzo is also know for his skill in preparing his team for the second game of the weekend. His teams have a reputation for strong play after a "two-day prep." Quantitatively, Figure 2 below compares the performance of the same group of coaches as Figure 1. In this case the x-axis shows the win percentage on the first game of the weekend. The y-axis shows the win percentage for the second games where the two-day prep is needed.Figure 2: Winning percentages for the top 56 all-time NCAA tournament coaches divided up by wins on the first day of the weekend (x-axis) and wins on the second day (y-axis) where a two-day prep is needed. The numbers in parentheses give the total number of tournament games each coach has played as in both scenarios.On the first day of the weekend, Izzo's record of 35-17 (67%) is one of the few fairly pedestrian NCAA Tournament stats on his resume. It is good for just 26th place among this group of 56 coaches.But Figure 2 does bolster the idea that he has a special ability to prepare his team on a limited timeline. Only six coaches own a better second day win percentage then Tom Izzo at 26-9 (74%) and only three of those coaches have done it having played more than six games.The only high volume coaches on this list are Larranaga (7-2, 78%), Crum (18-4, 82%), and Krzyewski (44-14, 76%). The other three coaches are Iowa State's T.J. Otzelberger (3-1, 75%), Arizona's Tommy Llyod (5-0, 100%), and May (6-0, 100%). In both Figures 1 and 2, it is important to note that having a reasonable sample size is important. For example, after just his sixth year as a head coach, Tom Izzo was 16-3 (84%) in NCAA Tournament play with a National Title and two additional Final Fours and a Sweet 16 appearance in four tournaments.Over this span, he was 16-1 (94%) as the higher seed and 0-1 as the underdog. Izzo was also 8-3 (73%) on the first day of the weekend and a perfect 8-0 on the second day. With the exception of upset wins, Izzo had an even more impressive position on both figures with these statistics after just his sixth year at the helm in East Lansing.It is even more impressive that he accomplished these feats without the use of the transfer portal or an NIL sugar daddy. But it is also a reminder that the true proficiency of a head coach cannot be judged just on a handful of NCAA Tournament appearances. Technically, former UConn coach Kevin Ollie (7-1, .875) and former Kansas State coach Jerome Tang (3-1, 0.750) have two of the highest NCAA Tournament win percentages in history. Ollie has a National Title and Tang appeared in the Elite Eight. But both coaches were fired from their respective universities and neither can be considered as an elite college basketball coach. One or two NCAA Tournament runs are nice, but consistent NCAA Tournament performance is far more rare and far more special.PREVIOUS: PART ONENEXT: PART THREE (coming soon)
It has been over a month since Tom Izzo and the Michigan State Spartans were eliminated from the NCAA Tournament by the UConn Huskies in the Sweet 16. It will also be approximately six months before next year's team takes to the court again. With the commitment of Anton Bonke on April 22 and the departure of guard Divine Ugochukwu via the transfer portal, it will now likely be a quiet summer in East Lansing on the basketball front.But one thing that Spartan fans can count on is that one of the best coaches in the history of the game will once again be patrolling the sidelines next season in the Breslin Center. As summer beckons, it is a good time to look back and reflect on the amazing career - so far - of Tom Izzo.Today kicks off the first installment of a three-part series on Izzo's many achievements to date.First, we will review Izzo's dominance over the Big Ten Conference, as well as some of his raw statistics and accomplishments in the Big Dance.In part two of this series, we will take a closer look at two NCAA Tournament factors where Izzo especially shines: wins as the lower seed and wins on a two-day prep. Finally, in part three, we will dig into some more advanced NCAA Tournament performance metrics and learn exactly how unique Izzo's accomplishments are relative to expectation and relative to every coach in the modern history of the Big Dance.Big Ten DominanceTom Izzo is currently the winningest coach in the history of the Big Ten Conference. He will likely hold onto this title for the foreseeable future.As of the end of the 2026 season, he currently holds the record for both total wins at a Big Ten school (764) and total Big Ten conference wins (375).Izzo's total win count exceeds second place (Indiana legend Bob Knight, 659 wins) by over 100 wins and the next highest active coach (Matt Painter of Purdue, 501) by over 250 wins. Knight is also currently in second place in all-time Big Ten wins with 353. Painter is sitting at fourth place (251 wins) just behind his predecessor, Gene Keady (265 wins).In 2025, Izzo tied the record for the most regular season Big Ten Titles (11). Knight and Purdue's Ward Lambert (1919-1946) also both have 11 titles.Izzo also owns the record for the most Big Ten Tournament titles at six. Former Ohio State coach Thad Matta is in second place with four titles. Painter and former Wisconsin coach Bo Ryan each have three titles. NCAA Tournament PerformanceWhile Tom Izzo's dominance over Big Ten opponents is remarkable, college basketball fans across the country will always remember Izzo as "Mr. March" for his consistent excellence in the Big Dance.Going forward, note that all NCAA Tournament stats and metrics are from the current modern era of the tournament, which I define as starting in 1979. This is the first year when teams were seeded and it is was the first time the tournament included more than 32 teams. Most fans are aware of Izzo's current record of 28 consecutive NCAA Tournament appearances. Mark Few and Gonzaga are right on the Spartans' heels with 27 consecutive appearances. But the next closest active steak is Purdue with 11, thanks, in part, to the fact that Kansas and Bill Self's 2018 tournament appearance was vacated.But Izzo's March accomplishments go far beyond simple staying power.As of 2026, he has 61 NCAA Tournament wins, which places him in a three-way tie all time with former Syracuse coach Jim Boeheim and John Calipari, who has coaches at UMass, Memphis, Kentucky, and Arkansas. Only Duke legend Mike Krzyewski (101 wins) and North Carolina's Roy Williams (79) have more.Izzo's overall tournament record of 61-27 (0.693) places him clearly in the top 20 all-time in the modern era for coaches with more than two appearances.He has advanced to the Sweet 16 a total of 17 times which equates to 61% of his total tournament appearances. Izzo's 17 appearances is tied with Calipari and only behind Boeheim (19), Williams (19), and Krzyewski (26) in the modern era.Note that, since 1998, Coach K (18) is the only coach with more Sweet 16 appearances than Izzo. Furthermore, there are only eight other programs total that have more than 17 Sweet Sixteen appearances since 1979 (Duke, North Carolina, Kentucky, Kansas, Arizona, Louisville, UCLA, and Syracuse). Izzo has more Sweet 16 appearances than Washington, Minnesota, USC, Nebraska, Penn State, Rutgers, and Northwestern combined (15) since 1979.He has advanced to the Elite Eight a total of 11 times (39% of appearances). This total is tied with Self for fifth place behind current Saint John's coach Rick Pitino (12), Calipari (12), Williams (13), and Krzyewski (17). Self is the only other coach with at least 11 regional final appearances since 1998. As programs, only Duke, North Carolina, Kentucky, Kansas, and UConn have more Elite Eight appearances in the modern era than Izzo. He also has more Elite Eight appearances than half of the Big Ten combined.Izzo has been to the Final Four a total of eight times (29% of all appearances), which trails only Williams (nine) and Krzyewski (13). Only North Carolina, Duke, Kansas, and Kentucky, as programs, have more Final Fours in the modern era than Izzo. No other coach has more than seven Final Fours since 1998. Izzo also has at least twice as many Final Fours as all Big Ten teams in the modern era except UCLA, not counting vacated appearances.UP NEXT: PART TWO
Some initial thoughts on what Sheridan's offense might bring to MSU
The ins and outs of a critical, much needed win for the Spartans over the Eagles in double overtime.
The Spartans are trying to hold on to the last spot in the Big Ten Tournament in Omaha
The Spartans remain in search of traction as they approach the heart of conference play
Yet again, it wasn't a weekend full of highlights for Jake Boss Jr’s Michigan State squad, as the Spartans fell to 3-11 after a sweep from the Nebraska Cornhuskers. The Spartans have only had one victory (Albany) since the opening Louisville series. The pitching totals were drastically different with MSU having a 6.42 ERA and 22 strikeouts compared to Nebraska's 2.38 ERA and 34 K’s. Nebraska: Power and PunchoutsThe Huskers' rotation lived up to its reputation for high-strikeout potential, totaling the aforementioned 34 strikeouts over the three games.Game 1: Extra InningsJunior Ty Horn set the tone on Friday, flashing a fastball that touched 96 mph. He turned in a "quality start," going 7.0 innings and allowing just one run while keeping the defense involved. Despite a late bullpen collapse by Kevin Mannell (who gave up the game-tying 3-run HR), J'Shawn Unger earned the win afteer escaping a 10th-inning jam. Michigan State looked to have stolen the momentum in th top of the 9th when Isaac Sturgess smashed a three-run home run to tie the game at 4-4. However, Nebraska’s Case Sanderson ended the night in the bottom of the 10th with a dramatic walk-off home run down the right-field line.Game 2: Pitching DominanceNebraska clinched the series win on Saturday behind a stellar start from Carson Jasa, who struck out nine batters in five innings. The Spartans struck first with a bases-loaded walk in the 4th, but the Huskers responded quickly.Jett Buck provided the insurance with a 376-foot solo blast in the 7th inning to secure the 3-1 victory. The 6-foot-7 sophomore right-hander was the definition of "effectively wild." Carson Jasa struck out 9 batters in just 5.0 innings. He faced significant trouble, including loading the bases in the 4th, but limited the damage to a single run.The Husker bullpen was perfect behind him, with Cooper Katskee moving from his usual starting role to secure a 2-inning save.Game 3: The Sunday RoutThe finale was all Nebraska from the start. Despite a solo homer by MSU’s Randy Seymour in the 1st, the Huskers exploded for 12 runs, including a 5-run first inning. Dylan Carey had a career day with two home runs, while sophomore right-hander Gavin Blachowicz tossed a 7-inning complete game, striking out a career-high 11 batters to trigger the run rule.Sophomore Gavin Blachowicz provided the most dominant performance of the weekend. After surrendering a leadoff homer, he retired 13 of the next 14 hitters. He finished with a career-high 11 strikeouts in a 7-inning complete game, showing elite command by only walking one batter. Grit vs. FatigueThe Spartans saw strong efforts from their front-line starters, but the depth of the staff was tested as the weekend progressed.Aidan Donovan (Friday): Donovan matched Ty Horn pitch-for-pitch for much of the opener. He threw 6.0 innings, scattering eight hits but yielding only two runs. He kept MSU in the game without issuing a single walk, a rare feat against a disciplined Nebraska lineup.Carter Monke (Saturday): The graduate transfer from Illinois State continued his strong season, pitching 4.2 innings and allowing only one earned run. He left the game with the score close, but was ultimately tagged with the loss as the offense failed to provide support.The Sunday Collapse: Junior Logan Pikur struggled to find the zone, lasting only one inning after being ambushed for 5 runs on 5 hits. The bullpen, including freshmen Kyle Rudolph and Bobby Crane, was forced into long relief early, leading to the run-rule finish.The Spartans will face Eastern Michigan (4-12) Tuesday afternoon and head to Rutgers (8-6) for a weekend series.The current Big Ten standings: USC, UCLA, Nebraska, Oregon, Washington, Indiana, Purdue, Iowa, Minnesota, Rutgers, Maryland, Michigan, Northwestern, Penn State, Illinois, Michigan State, and Ohio State.
The MSU women's basketball team had a valiant effort against OU, but fell short. Full recap here.
The Spartans adapted, survived, and advanced
The Spartan program has continued it's steady rise under Robyn Fralick
The Spartans will face three teams both home and away with the remaining opponents split as just once on the schedule in either East Lansing or on the road.
Belchetz is a projected first round pick in the upcoming 2026 NHL Draft
MSU's emphasis on building real commercial infrastructure looks increasingly valuable
