(12-22-2016 01:15 PM)kreed5120 Wrote:  I agree with what you are saying, but a 29-5 team would be extremely challenging to ignore. That kind of volume win total in a conference like the MAC, which is semi respectable, would make any MAC team perform well in Ken Pom, RPI, or whatever metric these guys use these days. At the absolute worst said MAC team would be a very controversial snub and lock for 1st 4 out.

It won't happen of course so no point in dwelling on it.

If Akron would've went 29-5 instead of 26-8 last year, they would've gotten in for sure, because they did have a somewhat decent resume that included 6-7 top 100 wins (even though all were in the 80-100 range) and another 5-6 in the top 150. That volume of wins with an OK resume and losing the title game on a buzzer beater would've gotten them in. Especially since virtually every bracketology had them as a 12 seed heading into the MAC title game.

Personally, I believe they may have gotten in at 27-7 if they didn't fall late in the year at Miami. That loss to a sub 250 team gave the committee an easy reason to dismiss them. Take that loss away and the Zips would've had the same resume as above, would've probably been about 4-5 spots higher in KenPom and RPI and would've had, IIR, just one loss to a team outside the KenPom top 150 at selection time (at Kent State, which was in the 170 range).

This year, even if Akron goes 29-5 and loses in the same fashion, it won't matter because the resume won't be there. Maybe another MAC team (or two) can climb into the top 100, but that probably means that team(s) would have win(s) over Akron, since it's the only top 100 team in the league right now. Maybe Marshall/Georgia Southern/UC-Irvine tear through their leagues and climb into the top 100, but that's unlikely. What I'm getting at is that Akron, even at 29-5, may not have one top 100 win all season and may only end with 5-6 in the top 150. That simply won't get it done, especially because there is a likely sub 250 loss already on the resume.

Eich41 brought up Murray State. That is the type of record a MAC team would need this year. ... and that is a mathematical impossibility since Akron and CMU already have three losses (and would get a fourth in the MAC title game).

But you're right, no team will end up close to 29-5 this year, so it's moot.

(12-22-2016 07:12 PM)Wadszip Wrote:  

(12-22-2016 01:15 PM)kreed5120 Wrote:  I agree with what you are saying, but a 29-5 team would be extremely challenging to ignore. That kind of volume win total in a conference like the MAC, which is semi respectable, would make any MAC team perform well in Ken Pom, RPI, or whatever metric these guys use these days. At the absolute worst said MAC team would be a very controversial snub and lock for 1st 4 out.

It won't happen of course so no point in dwelling on it.

If Akron would've went 29-5 instead of 26-8 last year, they would've gotten in for sure, because they did have a somewhat decent resume that included 6-7 top 100 wins (even though all were in the 80-100 range) and another 5-6 in the top 150. That volume of wins with an OK resume and losing the title game on a buzzer beater would've gotten them in. Especially since virtually every bracketology had them as a 12 seed heading into the MAC title game.

Personally, I believe they may have gotten in at 27-7 if they didn't fall late in the year at Miami. That loss to a sub 250 team gave the committee an easy reason to dismiss them. Take that loss away and the Zips would've had the same resume as above, would've probably been about 4-5 spots higher in KenPom and RPI and would've had, IIR, just one loss to a team outside the KenPom top 150 at selection time (at Kent State, which was in the 170 range).

This year, even if Akron goes 29-5 and loses in the same fashion, it won't matter because the resume won't be there. Maybe another MAC team (or two) can climb into the top 100, but that probably means that team(s) would have win(s) over Akron, since it's the only top 100 team in the league right now. Maybe Marshall/Georgia Southern/UC-Irvine tear through their leagues and climb into the top 100, but that's unlikely. What I'm getting at is that Akron, even at 29-5, may not have one top 100 win all season and may only end with 5-6 in the top 150. That simply won't get it done, especially because there is a likely sub 250 loss already on the resume.

Eich41 brought up Murray State. That is the type of record a MAC team would need this year. ... and that is a mathematical impossibility since Akron and CMU already have three losses (and would get a fourth in the MAC title game).

But you're right, no team will end up close to 29-5 this year, so it's moot.

I wouldn't count Marshall out from winning C-USA. They already have wins over 2 decent MAC teams and are currently beating Cincy. They have also been playing without one of their better players as he was academically ineligible this semester. Not saying they will win C-USA, but they should place very well in it and maybe if they catch a lucky break, win it.

(12-22-2016 09:25 AM)kreed5120 Wrote:  Akron has a chance today (and is heavily favored) to pick up its 2nd tournament trophy of the season. Has any other MAC teams won 1 this season?

How many teams play 2 tournaments period?

Ohio's only tournament was an invitational with GaTech, Sam Houston St, Southern and Tenn Tech. Ohio won it.

Frustrating, but I'd totally have to agree with the 8-9 slot for BSU. Years of terrible scheduling always leaves them unprepared for MAC play and will always show them as middling at this point of the season due to no marquee games. Potential to be a player this year, but no way of knowing at this point. For instance, today they are 351 for SOS on KenPom. Yes, dead last out of 351. Ugh. Three solid interior players, but a real lack of recruiting in that area (as well as PG, IMHO... Persons would be a great 2, but his ball handling is suspect) will leave BSU always at the middle of the pack. They have most of the pieces, including shooters for days, and potential for a solid D, but can't seem to totally get over the hump. 17 years of futility makes one question their fandom.

(12-23-2016 09:15 AM)pennies4everybody Wrote:  Frustrating, but I'd totally have to agree with the 8-9 slot for BSU. Years of terrible scheduling always leaves them unprepared for MAC play and will always show them as middling at this point of the season due to no marquee games. Potential to be a player this year, but no way of knowing at this point. For instance, today they are 351 for SOS on KenPom. Yes, dead last out of 351. Ugh. Three solid interior players, but a real lack of recruiting in that area (as well as PG, IMHO... Persons would be a great 2, but his ball handling is suspect) will leave BSU always at the middle of the pack. They have most of the pieces, including shooters for days, and potential for a solid D, but can't seem to totally get over the hump. 17 years of futility makes one question their fandom.

I do think the above experimental rankings are right about one thing:

Top Tier

CMU
EMU
Kent
Akron
Ohio
Toledo

Limbo Tier

Buffalo

Lower Tier

BSU
BGSU
WMU
NIU

Lowest Tier

Miami

Here's my pre-Christmas rankings (based off body or work per the KenPom rankings). First number is KenPom ranking. Second is where I put them last week.

Better than the bunch tier

1. Akron (87) (1): Zips are a blemish in the opener from being the clear-cut No. 1. Still holding steady with a league-leading five top 200 wins (I know, still sad resorting having to go down that low). Zips, though, actually now have two top 150 wins, tied with Toledo for most. Outside of the loss to YSU, other two are two teams still undefeated and both ranked in the top 21.

2. Toledo (141) (6): It's tough to put a team with six losses here, but I believe the resume warrants it. Wright State made a 20-spot jump into the top 200, giving the Rockets three in the top 200. The Rockets now hold the league's two highest-ranked wins No. 116 Loyola, No. 118 Evansville. Three of the losses are to teams in the top 100; two more in the top 131. No sub 200 losses.

3. Central Michigan (154) (4): Still has three top 200 wins (though two of them are to the same No. 175 Green Bay team ... which did beat Toledo). William & Mary is top win at No. 146. Two of the losses were to top 80 teams, but the Little Rock loss looking a bit worse as they've dropped to 181. The Chippewas don't have anything glaring on the resume, but nothing that sticks out.

4. Ohio (105) (2): The Bobcats blew a 21-4 lead in falling at No. 220 WKU for their first bad loss of the year. The Bobcats stay at two top 200 wins, though Georgia Tech, which was the league's second highest ranked win last week, is now fourth as GT fell to No. 142. Outside of WKU, no bad losses. Other two were to No. 107 Iona and No. 131 Marshall. Resume similar to CMU, but the sub 200 loss to WKU drops them here.

The maybe they can rejoin the top tier

5. Eastern Michigan (119) (5): EMU picked up a second top 200 win as Gardner Webb made a jump to No. 195, to go along with No. 169 Omaha. Still, the only other D1 win was against No. 299 Detroit. Four of the five losses were to teams in the top 100, worst was No. 159 IUPUI. EMU losing to Syracuse by 50 points this week and still only being 3-5 against D1 competition doesn't do anything, however, to answer the questions about this team.

6. Buffalo (136) (3): It wasn't a good week for the Bulls, falling at No. 266 Robert Morris. The Bulls only have one win in the top 200 (No. 162 Weber State), and like EMU only three D1 wins. Heading into this week all five losses were to top 100 team. But then back-to-back setbacks to No. 160 Canisius (actually a jump up from the No. 183 ranking at the time of the loss) and Robert Morris drops them back.

The even more questions than above tier

7. Ball State (176) (7): This is the lets stay invisible resume. There is no sub 200 losses (joining Toledo, EMU and CMU in there), but no sub 200 wins as Eastern Kentucky dropped to 227. In fact, five of the seven wins are now to sub 300 teams.

8. Northern Illinois (157) (10): Picked up two road wins this week, albeit against two sub 200 teams. Still, enough to move up a couple of spots due to Kent and BG suffering bad losses. NIU has just one top 200 win, No. 168 Indiana State and has two sub 200 losses. So moving up was simply by default.

9. Western Michigan (210) (11): The Broncos only have two D1 wins, and the highest ranked being to No. 251 James Madison. But overall, was a very good week for the Broncos. They went to the West Coast and took No. 89 Washington down to the wire and were within five points with five minutes left at No. 12 UCLA. Four of the eight losses are in the top 90, a fifth to No. 114 Oakland. However, they have two albatross losses to No. 240 Cleveland State (by 23) and to No. 303 UTEP. Still, the fact they have played four top 100 teams close (11 point loss to No. 1 Villanova, 5 point loss to No. 53 Wilmington), shows this team is better than their 2-8 D1 record.

10. Miami (284) (12): Miami looks like another team that is heading in the right direction. They've won two of three, including a top 200 win against No. 159 IUPUI. The one loss was in overtime at No. 86 Central Florida, so can't dock the Redhawks there. Overall, since Wright State is now inside, just one loss outside the top 200 to No. 280 Delaware in the second game of the year.

11. Kent State (170) (8): The Flashes take a tumble after two bad showings against sub 200 Wright State and Oregon State teams, though as mentioned, Wright State moved back in the top 200. Still the Flashes have (albeit barely) two sub 200 losses (No. 201 South Dakota and No. 202 Oregon State). They also don't have any wins in the top 200, the highest still being NJIT, which dropped back a bit to No. 212.

The basement

12. Bowling Green (209) (9): The Falcons suffered their third sub 200 loss at San Jose State, dropping them to the cellar. Their one top 200 win is not looking as good either as Murray State dropped about 30 spots to No. 186 this week. Other three wins were to No. 299, 330 and 351. With WMU, Miami and NIU all having positive weeks, the bottom tier is now lonely.

Kent trying to pull a major upset in austin

It would be a nice win, but the Vegas line was even.

(12-27-2016 08:50 PM)axeme Wrote:  It would be a nice win, but the Vegas line was even.

I think Kent was an 11 point dog

(12-27-2016 09:01 PM)MaddDawgz02 Wrote:  

(12-27-2016 08:50 PM)axeme Wrote:  It would be a nice win, but the Vegas line was even.

I think Kent was an 11 point dog

Seems reasonable but it said even on ESPN this a.m. That was probably a mistake. It's a great win either way. Texas. Shaka Smart has feasted on MAC teams for the most part. Not tonight.

(12-27-2016 09:05 PM)axeme Wrote:  

(12-27-2016 09:01 PM)MaddDawgz02 Wrote:  

(12-27-2016 08:50 PM)axeme Wrote:  It would be a nice win, but the Vegas line was even.

I think Kent was an 11 point dog

Seems reasonable but it said even on ESPN this a.m. That was probably a mistake. It's a great win either way. Texas. Shaka Smart has feasted on MAC teams for the most part. Not tonight.

That is why Kent did not fade much in my rankings after the OSU game, that team is just unreal with offensive rebounding.

Besides the offensive boards what stood out to me is that Kent was forcing the issue offensively with under 5 to go with a lead. How many times do upsets fall short from the underdog with the lead doing the prevent offense. Walker played out of his mind.

Walker is fearless to a fault.

Congrats to Kent on a very nice win.