http://www.ubbullrun.com/buffalo-basketb...rge-bubble

Quote:snip
....

One or two bigger name opponents with huge arenas and a willingness to buy games

This does not mean you have to hunt around for a top-10 team, merely one with a big stage. NIU had the right idea with Ohio State as did UB with Duke and Iowa State. One or two of these teams which typically finish among the top 50 and have a large, loud arena.

Three or four games against good teams from good conferences

Buffalo hosted Saint Bonaventure and came within a hair's breadth of pulling the upset. They also went on the road to Saint Joseph's.

There are 30+ NCAA Division I conferences and MAC teams should be scheduling two or three games with the better teams in the top half of those conferences.

Three or four games versus other respectable top 200 RPI teams.

I was going to suggest top 150 teams but in reality there is not a lot separating 149 from 199. Usually you're looking at teams with a win total in the mid- to high teens the previous year and who return some talent.

Three or four games against regional or state rivals regardless of their RPIs.

This would be UB playing Canisius, Niagara, Albany, Binghamton, or Stony Brook. In terms of your resume none of these teams add to your resume, save maybe Stony Brook, but it's good for the fans and community.

The media in Western New York has all but officially declared that UB and Saint Bonaventure are the two teams worth following. The two schools have owned Niagara and Canisius for the past 15 years and rendered the MAAC schools barely relevant.

That's good for Buffalo as they start to push the other two schools out of the papers and press, filling it instead with Blue and White, and means they can get away with a bit more of a rotation of rival games.

At most *one* DII game

And preferably have it be an exhibition before the season starts. There is just no reason to schedule more than one.

In total that would somewhere between 10-13 games plus an exhibition, and the schedules would give every MAC team a shot at some signature wins, wins which could help the MAC champion with seeding, get them on the bubble, or get a MAC team an a- large bid to the NCAA or NIT.

All we have to lose is a hollow 20+ win record.

Good read. Buffalo played three opponents that are in the Sweet 16 and five opponents that were in the Round of 32 (Yes I know one is Miami, which they played in the NCAA Tournament). The rest of the MAC combined played one Sweet 16 opponent (Akron - Villanova) and two teams in the Round of 32 (Miami - Xavier)

(03-21-2016 05:02 PM)BullBoy Wrote:  Good read. Buffalo played three opponents that are in the Sweet 16 and five opponents that were in the Round of 32 (Yes I know one is Miami, which they played in the NCAA Tournament). The rest of the MAC combined played one Sweet 16 opponent (Akron - Villanova) and two teams in the Round of 32 (Miami - Xavier)

more telling is that the conference played 22 DII teams... I think the A10 and AAC played a combined total of 4

The Zips do a good job of limiting their D2 opponents to just an exhibition game, but they definitely have room for improvement when it comes to facing top 50 OOC opponents. The selection committee has spoken and said a 26 win season in the MAC and top ~35 RPI is only good enough for a #6 seed in the NIT unless you schedule a challenging OOC schedule.

In addition to Akron adding 2 more power conference games to their OOC schedule, I'd like to see the MAC work something out with the CAA or MVC so that their is an annual challenge between them similar to B1G-ACC. This will give MAC teams a chance to host and get wins against quality caliber mid major teams while removing 1 cupcake game from everyone's schedule.

Playing D2 teams has gotten out of control and my alma mater is the worst offender in men's hoops. MAC teams need to focus on one-and-ones against other D1 teams and find good neutral court tourneys for a chance to take on some power teams. Limit the one and none games at power schools. It's almost always a losing proposition and how good is the money, anyway?

Just be careful replacing Div 2 teams with bad div 1 teams actually hurts you.

Also note the overall conference RPI is not bad. What each team is missing are some high quality wins. You don't have to play a lot of those but you do need to win some of those if you want an at large.

Going Miami from the early 2000s will not help the conference or your school. In that case your record will kill everybody including yourself.

You need to schedule games you can win and a lot of them. If you are a weaker team schedule weaker schools you can expect to beat. If you think you have a real winner schedule some teams that will show that off and look good at a committee. It is a balancing act.

(03-21-2016 06:01 PM)Sultan of Euphonistan Wrote:  Just be careful replacing Div 2 teams with bad div 1 teams actually hurts you.

Also note the overall conference RPI is not bad. What each team is missing are some high quality wins. You don't have to play a lot of those but you do need to win some of those if you want an at large.

Going Miami from the early 2000s will not help the conference or your school. In that case your record will kill everybody including yourself.

You need to schedule games you can win and a lot of them. If you are a weaker team schedule weaker schools you can expect to beat. If you think you have a real winner schedule some teams that will show that off and look good at a committee. It is a balancing act.

RPI has become a pretty worthless stat to the selection committee. It's clear stats like kenpom are the new standard.

I'd agree that a team like Miami would be best served padding their win total vs. lower quality opponents to build their program back to being respectable meanwhile teams like UB, OU, or Akron should seek to challenge themselves OOC.

The MAC has a lot of returning talent next season. If teams schedule properly and capitalize off that scheduling, next season might be the year the MAC has a serious at-large contender.

(03-21-2016 05:46 PM)kreed5120 Wrote:  The Zips do a good job of limiting their D2 opponents to just an exhibition game, but they definitely have room for improvement when it comes to facing top 50 OOC opponents. The selection committee has spoken and said a 26 win season in the MAC and top ~35 RPI is only good enough for a #6 seed in the NIT unless you schedule a challenging OOC schedule.

Yup Akron not being mentioned as a Bubble team and being such a low NIT seed was all the proof we need.

Quote:In addition to Akron adding 2 more power conference games to their OOC schedule, I'd like to see the MAC work something out with the CAA or MVC so that their is an annual challenge between them similar to B1G-ACC.

I'd love this! Reserve a week at some point and play a 1v1 2v2 .....

Couple thoughts:

1) While improving schedules is an imperative for the MAC--and likely means more road games--it's not just playing better teams, but beating them...and even then it's not enough (see Monmouth this season). Just as important is having a MAC school or two win a game or two in the NCAA tournament a couple seasons in a row--that's how mid-majors like Gonzaga, Butler, Wichita State & Northern Iowa made their marks.

2) The MAC struggles to take away tournament spots from conferences that don't play FBS football (namely Missouri Valley and A-10). Seems to me that it's very hard for MAC schools to make investments in both major sports, whereas those two conferences in particular can do so with basketball.

Scheduling depends a lot on your roster. Toledo for example had seven freshmen on the roster. Sometimes you need to build a teams confidence a bit. A senior laden team might be the opposite. But it takes two to tanto. Teams have to want to play you

Sent from my KFTHWI using Tapatalk

(03-21-2016 07:34 PM)bcunn3128 Wrote:  Couple thoughts:

1) While improving schedules is an imperative for the MAC--and likely means more road games--it's not just playing better teams, but beating them...and even then it's not enough (see Monmouth this season). Just as important is having a MAC school or two win a game or two in the NCAA tournament a couple seasons in a row--that's how mid-majors like Gonzaga, Butler, Wichita State & Northern Iowa made their marks.

2) The MAC struggles to take away tournament spots from conferences that don't play FBS football (namely Missouri Valley and A-10). Seems to me that it's very hard for MAC schools to make investments in both major sports, whereas those two conferences in particular can do so with basketball.

You mean cmu should not play lordes anymore?
I have been critical of cmu schedule last several years. OOC has been just embarrassing. Our coach claimed noone wanted to play cmu this year with their quick rise to success last year. I call BS. There are plenty of OVC, Missouri valley, Horizon, teams to prevent from having to go NAIA, or D3 and D2 route CMU has done.

Only way MAC gets at large bid is if they have a 30 win squad lose in the tourney championship game and then gets picked at large. Though not impossible, the committee would have very hard trouble explaining leaving a 30 win squad out of the big dance.

Monmouth is calling B***S***!

They ran the gauntlet and did well and still got ******.

(03-21-2016 07:34 PM)bcunn3128 Wrote:  Couple thoughts:

1) While improving schedules is an imperative for the MAC--and likely means more road games--it's not just playing better teams, but beating them...and even then it's not enough (see Monmouth this season). Just as important is having a MAC school or two win a game or two in the NCAA tournament a couple seasons in a row--that's how mid-majors like Gonzaga, Butler, Wichita State & Northern Iowa made their marks.

Monmouth gets an at-large out of the MAC with that OOC schedule and a 27 win season. Monmouth problem was they played a handful or so of good teams OOC then played a bunch of mostly ****** teams in conference play. Miami, who finished 11th in the MAC, would have been 5th in MAAC. The MAC is the 10th rated conference. The MAAC is the 20th. The MAC provides opportunities for top 100 and top 150 wins. The MAAC provides opportunities for RPI 200+ losses which Monmouth had 3 of.

Even if the MAC teams were to lose an extra game or 2 in the regular season by playing a tougher OOC, playing these teams better prepares them for tournament time.

(03-21-2016 08:06 PM)OUVan Wrote:  Monmouth is calling B***S***!

They ran the gauntlet and did well and still got ******.

You need several teams in your conference to do this. Buffalo or Akron or Ohio is not going to be enough. For the MAC you would hope the teams which have generally been the top half of the conference for the past several years* could schedule right then we can start stacking up quality wins as a conference.


*Akron, Ohio, Buffalo, Kent, CMU, WMU

(03-21-2016 07:46 PM)indianasniff Wrote:  But it takes two to tanto. Teams have to want to play you

This can't be said enough. There's a reason why schedules look the way they do.

(03-21-2016 10:34 PM)JSF Wrote:  

(03-21-2016 07:46 PM)indianasniff Wrote:  But it takes two to tanto. Teams have to want to play you

This can't be said enough. There's a reason why schedules look the way they do.

I'm sorry that's horse shaq. You cant blame "two to tango" for 4 freaking DII schools on the schedule or a slew of sub 250 teams. You blame a lazy attempt by the AD to put together a schedule.

Why is it Buffalo can do it? What do we have that Akron, Ohio, or CMU is lacking?

(03-21-2016 11:51 PM)Bull_In_Exile Wrote:  

(03-21-2016 10:34 PM)JSF Wrote:  

(03-21-2016 07:46 PM)indianasniff Wrote:  But it takes two to tanto. Teams have to want to play you

This can't be said enough. There's a reason why schedules look the way they do.

I'm sorry that's horse shaq. You cant blame "two to tango" for 4 freaking DII schools on the schedule or a slew of sub 250 teams. You blame a lazy attempt by the AD to put together a schedule.

Why is it Buffalo can do it? What do we have that Akron, Ohio, or CMU is lacking?

I usually don't defend Akron's schedule, but this year's was very solid (and overall it has been trending up). They played in the preseason NIT, which gave them 4 games (three on the road against what should've been three very good teams). Villanova for sure was a legit game. Green Bay ended up winning the Horizon tourney. What ended up hurting them was Arkansas, a Sweet 16 team, which had two starters booted before the season started. True, that helped Akron in getting the win, but, overall, made that win meaningless. What can you do there outside actually winning, which Akron did?

Then they played in a mid major Vegas "tournament" agianst Iona (MAAC tourney champ) and Santa Barbara... Both were top 100 in RPI and KenPom at the end of the regular season. That's just as good as what you would get in a MAC vs. Colonial/MVC series (though I agree that would be a great thing if it could happen).

Then they played a neutral court game against backyard rival Cleveland State. That game killed them as CSU was horrible. But CSU would've been a tourney caliber team if it didn't lose its top two players to grad transfers (Trey Lewis to Louisville and Anton Grady to Wichita State). Again, what can you do? Plus, nearly every MAC team played CSU, it seemed, which really hurt the league.

Then Akron played, and won by double digits, a true road game against a solid Marshall team.

That's 8 of the 14 OOC games away from the JAR, at that point, you had to bring in who you can. Charleston Southern, which was the defending Big South champ, was forced due to the NIT. They happened to suck. What can you do there?

Bethune-Cookman, Coppin State, South Carolina State and Lipscomb were all bad, but home games. And SCSU did make the MEAC title game. Then Hiram was the D2, but won't affect your ranking, game.

I don't see any problem with that schedule. In fact, if every MAC school scheduled like that, and picked up a few more wins against solid teams (Arkansas, UCSB, Iona and Marshall) maybe the league would've gotten two teams in.

But you can't fault Akron for that. The Zips do own the league's last three wins over P5 teams (Arkansas, USC, South Carolina) and have five in the last four years when you add in Oregon State and Penn State. True, none were great wins, but still better than what the rest of the MAC can claim. I'm guessing that's more wins by themselves than the rest of the league has combined in that period. Akron's recent mid-major wins also stack up to the rest of the league.

(03-22-2016 01:33 AM)Wadszip Wrote:  

(03-21-2016 11:51 PM)Bull_In_Exile Wrote:  

(03-21-2016 10:34 PM)JSF Wrote:  

(03-21-2016 07:46 PM)indianasniff Wrote:  But it takes two to tanto. Teams have to want to play you

This can't be said enough. There's a reason why schedules look the way they do.

I'm sorry that's horse shaq. You cant blame "two to tango" for 4 freaking DII schools on the schedule or a slew of sub 250 teams. You blame a lazy attempt by the AD to put together a schedule.

Why is it Buffalo can do it? What do we have that Akron, Ohio, or CMU is lacking?

I usually don't defend Akron's schedule, but this year's was very solid (and overall it has been trending up). They played in the preseason NIT, which gave them 4 games (three on the road against what should've been three very good teams). Villanova for sure was a legit game. Green Bay ended up winning the Horizon tourney. What ended up hurting them was Arkansas, a Sweet 16 team, which had two starters booted before the season started. True, that helped Akron in getting the win, but, overall, made that win meaningless. What can you do there outside actually winning, which Akron did?

Then they played in a mid major Vegas "tournament" agianst Iona (MAAC tourney champ) and Santa Barbara... Both were top 100 in RPI and KenPom at the end of the regular season. That's just as good as what you would get in a MAC vs. Colonial/MVC series (though I agree that would be a great thing if it could happen).

Then they played a neutral court game against backyard rival Cleveland State. That game killed them as CSU was horrible. But CSU would've been a tourney caliber team if it didn't lose its top two players to grad transfers (Trey Lewis to Louisville and Anton Grady to Wichita State). Again, what can you do? Plus, nearly every MAC team played CSU, it seemed, which really hurt the league.

Then Akron played, and won by double digits, a true road game against a solid Marshall team.

That's 8 of the 14 OOC games away from the JAR, at that point, you had to bring in who you can. Charleston Southern, which was the defending Big South champ, was forced due to the NIT. They happened to suck. What can you do there?

Bethune-Cookman, Coppin State, South Carolina State and Lipscomb were all bad, but home games. And SCSU did make the MEAC title game. Then Hiram was the D2, but won't affect your ranking, game.

I don't see any problem with that schedule. In fact, if every MAC school scheduled like that, and picked up a few more wins against solid teams (Arkansas, UCSB, Iona and Marshall) maybe the league would've gotten two teams in.

But you can't fault Akron for that. The Zips do own the league's last three wins over P5 teams (Arkansas, USC, South Carolina) and have five in the last four years when you add in Oregon State and Penn State. True, none were great wins, but still better than what the rest of the MAC can claim. I'm guessing that's more wins by themselves than the rest of the league has combined in that period. Akron's recent mid-major wins also stack up to the rest of the league.

I definitely agree this season was an improvement in scheduling for Akron. My complaint is they used neutral court opportunities to face UCSB and Iona. Teams that they could potentially schedule home and home with. I would have liked to get into a tournament that featured higher profile teams. No P5 team with any kind of a name will come to the JAR so your best opportunity to steal a win from a top 50 RPI P5 team is on a neutral court. Not to say you can't beat them in their house. Just that it is easier when both teams are on equal footing.

Would it translate into 1 less home game? Sure, but it would offer the opportunity to get that resume building win(s)

Dear MAC Members,
This is all about money, and it always will. If any school wants to bring in a high quality/value opponent, they are going to have to guarantee a certain payout to that team. Let's say you will have to guarantee $20,000 to those opponents, and you have three or four as home games, do the math. Now your school may have to schedule an away game or two with a quality opponent to try and make up some of that payout. On top of that, your team has to win enough to keep fans coming to help defray costs as well, and every team will not have a winning season every year.