Here are your top 5 mid major conferences right now

1. West Coast .5252
2. Mid-American .5172
3. Missouri Valley .5157
4. Big West .4988
5. Horizon .4948


The talk has begun on the MAC board about the possibility of the MAC being a 2-bid league. With 6 teams in the top 100, and it being the 2nd best mid major conference in the country, it is time to have that discussion.

(02-16-2015 06:50 PM)MaddDawgz02 Wrote:  Here are your top 5 mid major conferences right now

1. West Coast .5252
2. Mid-American .5172
3. Missouri Valley .5157
4. Big West .4988
5. Horizon .4948


The talk has begun on the MAC board about the possibility of the MAC being a 2-bid league. With 6 teams in the top 100, and it being the 2nd best mid major conference in the country, it is time to have that discussion.

Yeah, the talk was "are we a 2-bid league" and the consensus is "no."

You have to have top 50 teams to get an at large. We don't have any.

This is a joke. The RPI is going to get worse as the conference season goes along. Also, at large bids aren't going to be given to a team with an RPI of 60+. There are 36 at large bids. The Big East will have at least 5 teams, Big Ten 5, SEC 5, PAC 4, Big 12 6, American 3, ACC 7...

(02-16-2015 07:19 PM)armour248 Wrote:  This is a joke. The RPI is going to get worse as the conference season goes along.

Quite the contrary, the conference season has and will continue to boost the RPI. Every team's SOS has been helped out by playing other MAC teams. This is due to the fact the MAC cleaned up during the non-conference season. Now MAC teams are being rewarded for that non-conference season by playing stronger in-conference opponenets

(02-16-2015 07:16 PM)niusfactuary Wrote:  

(02-16-2015 06:50 PM)MaddDawgz02 Wrote:  Here are your top 5 mid major conferences right now

1. West Coast .5252
2. Mid-American .5172
3. Missouri Valley .5157
4. Big West .4988
5. Horizon .4948


The talk has begun on the MAC board about the possibility of the MAC being a 2-bid league. With 6 teams in the top 100, and it being the 2nd best mid major conference in the country, it is time to have that discussion.

Yeah, the talk was "are we a 2-bid league" and the consensus is "no."

You have to have top 50 teams to get an at large. We don't have any.

BG is knocking on the door at 58. I just have never seen the MAC this deep in all my life.

Will not happen.

(02-16-2015 08:09 PM)huskie1stdown Wrote:  Will not happen.

I agree, but I think the important point is that it should. Its one of the best if not THE best mid major conference this year. If the MVC had the type of year the MAC was having, the MVC would get 5 teams in. Its not really fair to be honest.

(02-16-2015 10:21 PM)MaddDawgz02 Wrote:  

(02-16-2015 08:09 PM)huskie1stdown Wrote:  Will not happen.

I agree, but I think the important point is that it should. Its one of the best if not THE best mid major conference this year. If the MVC had the type of year the MAC was having, the MVC would get 5 teams in. Its not really fair to be honest.

What the actual ****?

The MVC has had a year where its RPI ranked higher than a BCS conference (for the second straight year at 6th overall) in 2007, yet received just 2 bids.

The one year the MVC deserved 5 bids (and didn't get it) was when the should-have-been 5th bid (2006 Missouri State) was left out with an RPI of 21--the highest RPI to be left out of the tournament in the 64-team era. The MVC#5 that year was 35 spots higher than the MAC#1 this year. They sent more teams to the Sweet-16 that year than the Big Ten and Big 12 combined.

The MAC has never had 2 teams as good in a season as Northern Iowa and Wichita State this year. Not even close.

To act like the MAC is a victim while the MVC receives gross charities of epic proportions in the college basketball world is such a detachment from reality it's not even funny.

(02-17-2015 01:50 AM)IWokeUpLikeThis Wrote:  

(02-16-2015 10:21 PM)MaddDawgz02 Wrote:  

(02-16-2015 08:09 PM)huskie1stdown Wrote:  Will not happen.

I agree, but I think the important point is that it should. Its one of the best if not THE best mid major conference this year. If the MVC had the type of year the MAC was having, the MVC would get 5 teams in. Its not really fair to be honest.

What the actual ****?

The MVC has had a year where its RPI ranked higher than a BCS conference (for the second straight year at 6th overall) in 2007, yet received just 2 bids.

The one year the MVC deserved 5 bids (and didn't get it) was when the should-have-been 5th bid (2006 Missouri State) was left out with an RPI of 21--the highest RPI to be left out of the tournament in the 64-team era. The MVC#5 that year was 35 spots higher than the MAC#1 this year. They sent more teams to the Sweet-16 that year than the Big Ten and Big 12 combined.

The MAC has never had 2 teams as good in a season as Northern Iowa and Wichita State this year. Not even close.

To act like the MAC is a victim while the MVC receives gross charities of epic proportions in the college basketball world is such a detachment from reality it's not even funny.

The MVC is not nearly as good as deep as the MAC this year, which is why the MAC is currently ranked ahead of the MVC

(02-17-2015 08:46 AM)MaddDawgz02 Wrote:  

(02-17-2015 01:50 AM)IWokeUpLikeThis Wrote:  

(02-16-2015 10:21 PM)MaddDawgz02 Wrote:  

(02-16-2015 08:09 PM)huskie1stdown Wrote:  Will not happen.

I agree, but I think the important point is that it should. Its one of the best if not THE best mid major conference this year. If the MVC had the type of year the MAC was having, the MVC would get 5 teams in. Its not really fair to be honest.

What the actual ****?

The MVC has had a year where its RPI ranked higher than a BCS conference (for the second straight year at 6th overall) in 2007, yet received just 2 bids.

The one year the MVC deserved 5 bids (and didn't get it) was when the should-have-been 5th bid (2006 Missouri State) was left out with an RPI of 21--the highest RPI to be left out of the tournament in the 64-team era. The MVC#5 that year was 35 spots higher than the MAC#1 this year. They sent more teams to the Sweet-16 that year than the Big Ten and Big 12 combined.

The MAC has never had 2 teams as good in a season as Northern Iowa and Wichita State this year. Not even close.

To act like the MAC is a victim while the MVC receives gross charities of epic proportions in the college basketball world is such a detachment from reality it's not even funny.

The MVC is not nearly as good as deep as the MAC this year, which is why the MAC is currently ranked ahead of the MVC

Record against RPI 100:

Wichita: 6 - 3
Northern Iowa: 6 - 1

Bowling Green: 2 - 4
Buffalo: 2 - 6

No signature wins for the top MAC teams. One bid league once again.

(02-17-2015 08:46 AM)MaddDawgz02 Wrote:  

(02-17-2015 01:50 AM)IWokeUpLikeThis Wrote:  

(02-16-2015 10:21 PM)MaddDawgz02 Wrote:  

(02-16-2015 08:09 PM)huskie1stdown Wrote:  Will not happen.

I agree, but I think the important point is that it should. Its one of the best if not THE best mid major conference this year. If the MVC had the type of year the MAC was having, the MVC would get 5 teams in. Its not really fair to be honest.

What the actual ****?

The MVC has had a year where its RPI ranked higher than a BCS conference (for the second straight year at 6th overall) in 2007, yet received just 2 bids.

The one year the MVC deserved 5 bids (and didn't get it) was when the should-have-been 5th bid (2006 Missouri State) was left out with an RPI of 21--the highest RPI to be left out of the tournament in the 64-team era. The MVC#5 that year was 35 spots higher than the MAC#1 this year. They sent more teams to the Sweet-16 that year than the Big Ten and Big 12 combined.

The MAC has never had 2 teams as good in a season as Northern Iowa and Wichita State this year. Not even close.

To act like the MAC is a victim while the MVC receives gross charities of epic proportions in the college basketball world is such a detachment from reality it's not even funny.

The MVC is not nearly as good as deep as the MAC this year, which is why the MAC is currently ranked ahead of the MVC

I'm not shocked you dodged the entire post.

"Not nearly as deep" is accurate. Bradley, SIU, and Missouri St are epically awful this year.

"Not nearly as good" is laughable. The RPI difference is a razor thin .0015.

(02-17-2015 10:08 AM)IWokeUpLikeThis Wrote:  I'm not shocked you dodged the entire post.

That was a truly remarkable attempt to avoid addressing the information you posted. This entire thread is ridiculous to begin with. Now the MVC vs MAC talk has taken it to the batshit insane level that only MD is capable of

The MAC tourney decides the National Champion this year. BOOK IT!

Arguing "conference strength" is a waste of time. Bids aren't handed out to conferences (other than auto bids. One could make an argument out for bias, sometimes, sure.). It's on an individual team's resume.

Who did you beat? That's the questions asked. The MAC doesn't have a team that has a a bunch of high end wins.

(02-17-2015 02:02 PM)The Frisky Biscuit Wrote:  Who did you beat? That's the questions asked. The MAC doesn't have a team that has any high end wins.

Fixed that for you.

MaddDawgz2 Read what The Frisky Biscuit and armour248 posted at 1:02 and 1:44 and if you don't believe them, then read Teddy Greenstein's piece into today's Tribune. Personally think Teddy is an egotistical, spoiled Northwestern brat -- nevertheless he's taking part in an NCAA bracketology seminar on using the methods of the selection committee. He writes the following:
We use "team pages" to analyze the resumes, and the home, road and neutral-court factor is prominent. So is a team's record against foes in the RIP 1-50, 51-100, 101-150, 151-200 and 200-plus. What doesn't matter -- conference record or conference RPI.

In regard to a discussion on Wisconsin versus Gonzaga for the last No. 1 seed, the Zags were cited for "their lone loss coming on the road, by three points, to a top-10 RPI in Arizona. Plus the Bulldogs have been blowing away their WCC foes by double digits." But another committee member asked "Wouldn't Wisconsin do the same if they were in that league?" The Badgers are ultimately given the nod because they have a 5-1 record against the RPI Top 50 and UW's "ugly loss (67-62 at Rutgers)" is downplayed because Kaminsky was out with a concussion and point guard Traveon Jackson left with a foot injury after 26 minutes.
The committee discussed if "a team gets credit for 'hanging with' a tough opponent? And what's more significant -- a good win or bad loss?" (Answer is both because it's up to each committee member."

Okay, take all that into consideration and as Frisky said "the MAC doesn't have a bunch of high-end wins and as armour further clarifies, "the MAC doesn't have a team that has any high-end wins." For a second bid, the emphasis is on wins vs. RPI 1-50, 51-100, and possibly 101-150. Throw in losses to 251 and up and you've got an immediate red line drawn through your name.

(02-17-2015 03:04 PM)uiniu57 Wrote:  MaddDawgz2 Read what The Frisky Biscuit and armour248 posted at 1:02 and 1:44 and if you don't believe them, then read Teddy Greenstein's piece into today's Tribune. Personally think Teddy is an egotistical, spoiled Northwestern brat -- nevertheless he's taking part in an NCAA bracketology seminar on using the methods of the selection committee. He writes the following:
We use "team pages" to analyze the resumes, and the home, road and neutral-court factor is prominent. So is a team's record against foes in the RIP 1-50, 51-100, 101-150, 151-200 and 200-plus. What doesn't matter -- conference record or conference RPI.

In regard to a discussion on Wisconsin versus Gonzaga for the last No. 1 seed, the Zags were cited for "their lone loss coming on the road, by three points, to a top-10 RPI in Arizona. Plus the Bulldogs have been blowing away their WCC foes by double digits." But another committee member asked "Wouldn't Wisconsin do the same if they were in that league?" The Badgers are ultimately given the nod because they have a 5-1 record against the RPI Top 50 and UW's "ugly loss (67-62 at Rutgers)" is downplayed because Kaminsky was out with a concussion and point guard Traveon Jackson left with a foot injury after 26 minutes.
The committee discussed if "a team gets credit for 'hanging with' a tough opponent? And what's more significant -- a good win or bad loss?" (Answer is both because it's up to each committee member."

Okay, take all that into consideration and as Frisky said "the MAC doesn't have a bunch of high-end wins and as armour further clarifies, "the MAC doesn't have a team that has any high-end wins." For a second bid, the emphasis is on wins vs. RPI 1-50, 51-100, and possibly 101-150. Throw in losses to 251 and up and you've got an immediate red line drawn through your name.

The MAC has 6 top 100 teams, plenty of opportunity for quality wins, and many of those top 6 teams already have high quality wins. Im not arguing the fact the MAC will get shut out, Im just saying based on performance, it should be a multiple bid league, at least this year. As we know though, performance means little.

(02-17-2015 04:17 PM)MaddDawgz02 Wrote:  The MAC has 6 top 100 teams, plenty of opportunity for quality wins, and many of those top 6 teams already have high quality wins. Im not arguing the fact the MAC will get shut out, Im just saying based on performance, it should be a multiple bid league, at least this year. As we know though, performance means little.

You're insane.

(02-17-2015 04:17 PM)MaddDawgz02 Wrote:  The MAC has 6 top 100 teams, plenty of opportunity for quality wins, and many of those top 6 teams already have high quality wins. Im not arguing the fact the MAC will get shut out, Im just saying based on performance, it should be a multiple bid league, at least this year. As we know though, performance means little.

That statement is absolutely, 100%, factually incorrect from a selection committee standpoint. It could not be any more wrong.

MAC is a one bid Conf again this year.....