Hello There, Guest! (LoginRegister)

Post Reply 
MAC Tournament Predictions 2017
Author Message
Bookmark and Share
bobcat_backer Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 6,572
Joined: Oct 2005
Reputation: 64
I Root For: OHIO
Location: Westerville, Ohio
Post: #41
RE: MAC Tournament Predictions 2017
(03-07-2017 10:45 AM)BobcatEngineer Wrote:  Looks like CBS Sports has Akron winning the MAC Tournament. They have them entering the Dance as the #13 seed, playing #4 Purdue in the 1st round.

most pundits, including ESPN's Joe Linardi, have had Akron in the tournament for weeks. for the mid-majors, all they do is look at the weekly standings and see who is in first and that's who they put in their projected brackets. doesn't necessarily mean anything.
03-07-2017 01:02 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
emu steve Online
Legend
*

Posts: 39,447
Joined: Jan 2004
Reputation: 83
I Root For: EMU / MAC
Location: DMV - D.C. area
Post: #42
RE: MAC Tournament Predictions 2017
(03-07-2017 01:02 PM)bobcat_backer Wrote:  
(03-07-2017 10:45 AM)BobcatEngineer Wrote:  Looks like CBS Sports has Akron winning the MAC Tournament. They have them entering the Dance as the #13 seed, playing #4 Purdue in the 1st round.

most pundits, including ESPN's Joe Linardi, have had Akron in the tournament for weeks. for the mid-majors, all they do is look at the weekly standings and see who is in first and that's who they put in their projected brackets. doesn't necessarily mean anything.

Yeah, they don't follow the MAC closely.

Just look at the results WMU, BSU, Kent, Toledo and even EMU ( 3 - 1) have better recent records than Akron.

If anyone looks at the records, like hello, WMU and hello BSU. Those teams are on a roll.
03-07-2017 02:37 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
MaddDawgz02 Offline
Banned

Posts: 40,735
Joined: Jan 2004
I Root For: any UT opponent
Location:
Post: #43
RE: MAC Tournament Predictions 2017
(03-07-2017 02:37 PM)emu steve Wrote:  
(03-07-2017 01:02 PM)bobcat_backer Wrote:  
(03-07-2017 10:45 AM)BobcatEngineer Wrote:  Looks like CBS Sports has Akron winning the MAC Tournament. They have them entering the Dance as the #13 seed, playing #4 Purdue in the 1st round.

most pundits, including ESPN's Joe Linardi, have had Akron in the tournament for weeks. for the mid-majors, all they do is look at the weekly standings and see who is in first and that's who they put in their projected brackets. doesn't necessarily mean anything.

Yeah, they don't follow the MAC closely.

Just look at the results WMU, BSU, Kent, Toledo and even EMU ( 3 - 1) have better recent records than Akron.

If anyone looks at the records, like hello, WMU and hello BSU. Those teams are on a roll.

I think BSU could be fools gold again
03-07-2017 03:21 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
perimeterpost Offline
All American
*

Posts: 4,977
Joined: Nov 2010
Reputation: 132
I Root For: OHIO
Location:
Post: #44
RE: MAC Tournament Predictions 2017
(03-07-2017 01:02 PM)bobcat_backer Wrote:  
(03-07-2017 10:45 AM)BobcatEngineer Wrote:  Looks like CBS Sports has Akron winning the MAC Tournament. They have them entering the Dance as the #13 seed, playing #4 Purdue in the 1st round.

most pundits, including ESPN's Joe Linardi, have had Akron in the tournament for weeks. for the mid-majors, all they do is look at the weekly standings and see who is in first and that's who they put in their projected brackets. doesn't necessarily mean anything.

its automated based on highest RPI.
03-07-2017 07:28 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
axeme Offline
Sage
*

Posts: 20,009
Joined: May 2002
Reputation: 125
I Root For: hoops
Location: Location: Location:

Folding@NCAAbbsDonatorsCrappiesCrappiesCrappiesCrappiesCrappies
Post: #45
RE: MAC Tournament Predictions 2017
BTW, for those who were hemming and hawing about Akron's at-large chances far into the season, please note that almost no one has Illinois St. with any at large hopes at all. RPI--30. RPI just doesn't matter. Quality wins.
(This post was last modified: 03-07-2017 08:01 PM by axeme.)
03-07-2017 07:54 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Wadszip Offline
2nd String
*

Posts: 485
Joined: Mar 2011
Reputation: 4
I Root For: Akron
Location:
Post: #46
RE: MAC Tournament Predictions 2017
(03-07-2017 02:37 PM)emu steve Wrote:  
(03-07-2017 01:02 PM)bobcat_backer Wrote:  
(03-07-2017 10:45 AM)BobcatEngineer Wrote:  Looks like CBS Sports has Akron winning the MAC Tournament. They have them entering the Dance as the #13 seed, playing #4 Purdue in the 1st round.

most pundits, including ESPN's Joe Linardi, have had Akron in the tournament for weeks. for the mid-majors, all they do is look at the weekly standings and see who is in first and that's who they put in their projected brackets. doesn't necessarily mean anything.

Yeah, they don't follow the MAC closely.

Just look at the results WMU, BSU, Kent, Toledo and even EMU ( 3 - 1) have better recent records than Akron.

If anyone looks at the records, like hello, WMU and hello BSU. Those teams are on a roll.

And what is Akron's record this year vs. those teams?

P.S. it's 7-1.

Not sure why anybody would get bent out of shape about somebody having Akron (the team that literally led the league from start to finish ... and by at least two games after three games) as their projected MAC representative.
03-07-2017 08:26 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
kreed5120 Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 2,080
Joined: Feb 2016
Reputation: 54
I Root For: Akron
Location:
Post: #47
RE: MAC Tournament Predictions 2017
(03-07-2017 07:54 PM)axeme Wrote:  BTW, for those who were hemming and hawing about Akron's at-large chances far into the season, please note that almost no one has Illinois St. with any at large hopes at all. RPI--30. RPI just doesn't matter. Quality wins.

Illinois State is 27-6, not 30-4 which is what I stated Akron would have to do to get an at-large. I also stated Akron wouldn't go 30-4. I still stand by my statement that a 30-4 MAC team would make the tournament.
(This post was last modified: 03-07-2017 08:38 PM by kreed5120.)
03-07-2017 08:36 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Wadszip Offline
2nd String
*

Posts: 485
Joined: Mar 2011
Reputation: 4
I Root For: Akron
Location:
Post: #48
RE: MAC Tournament Predictions 2017
(03-07-2017 07:54 PM)axeme Wrote:  BTW, for those who were hemming and hawing about Akron's at-large chances far into the season, please note that almost no one has Illinois St. with any at large hopes at all. RPI--30. RPI just doesn't matter. Quality wins.

Illinois State also has six losses. Every single person who posted about Akron having at-large hopes (at least all the Akron fans) were saying that if the Zips went 18-0 in league play and lost in the MAC finals, they would likely be in at 30-4.

A couple people thought there was still a slim chance at 29-5 (myself not included in that). But as soon as the Zips lost to Kent, absolutely nobody still tried to argue they had any chance of an at-large, regardless of what the RPI could've still ended at.

Overall, though, I agree 100 percent with RPI being meaningless and quality wins being the most important thing.

However, I still think the committee is willing to strongly consider a mid-major team with a "weak" resume if that team finishes with five or less losses and plays in a competitive league (which the MVC definitely is ... so is the MAC).

If Illinois State wouldn't beat one of Murray State, Tulsa or San Francisco, I think they would be have been bumped from that first four out to last four in. (Illinois State has one-more game leeway over Akron, IMO, due to the MVC being a stronger league ... plus having a legit power in Wichita State winning it).
(This post was last modified: 03-07-2017 08:46 PM by Wadszip.)
03-07-2017 08:42 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
axeme Offline
Sage
*

Posts: 20,009
Joined: May 2002
Reputation: 125
I Root For: hoops
Location: Location: Location:

Folding@NCAAbbsDonatorsCrappiesCrappiesCrappiesCrappiesCrappies
Post: #49
RE: MAC Tournament Predictions 2017
Could you guys give me a recent example of a mid-major team with 4+ losses and without a quality non-conference win who got an at-large? I just don't see it happening.
03-07-2017 08:49 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
kreed5120 Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 2,080
Joined: Feb 2016
Reputation: 54
I Root For: Akron
Location:
Post: #50
RE: MAC Tournament Predictions 2017
(03-07-2017 08:49 PM)axeme Wrote:  Could you guys give me a recent example of a mid-major team with 4+ losses and without a quality non-conference win who got an at-large? I just don't see it happening.

Can you point me to a team that has won 28+ games and not made the tournament? Spoiler: no such team exists. Sorry not buying a 30 win team from a solid mid-major missing the tournament regardless of who they beat or didn't beat.

Like Wadzip I agree quality wins matter, but a team winning 30 games in the MAC or MVC would be a hell of an accomplishment and feel the committee would acknowledge it.
(This post was last modified: 03-07-2017 09:11 PM by kreed5120.)
03-07-2017 09:09 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Wadszip Offline
2nd String
*

Posts: 485
Joined: Mar 2011
Reputation: 4
I Root For: Akron
Location:
Post: #51
RE: MAC Tournament Predictions 2017
(03-07-2017 08:49 PM)axeme Wrote:  Could you guys give me a recent example of a mid-major team with 4+ losses and without a quality non-conference win who got an at-large? I just don't see it happening.

Like Kreed said, one doesn't exist. I think you are hoping to bait one of us into saying "Murray State" in 2010.

While Murray State likely would've been left out, since they only got a 13 seed after winning the OVC. But the OVC is still a tier below the MAC, so not quite apples to apples.

And there was a lot of talk heading into that OVC championship game about the bubble teams needing to be rooting against Morehead State.

Overall, though, that Murray State example probably only strengthens the argument for a 30-win MAC team getting in. If Murray State lost, they likely would've been NIT bound. That Murray State team only went on to beat No. 4 seeded Vanderbilt in the first round and then lost a nail-biter to a Butler team that ended up 2 points away from a national championship.

A bit closer to home, Kent in 2008 definitely would've been a tournament team even if they lost to Akron in the MAC title game. No way they go from a No. 9 to out of the tournament.

And outside of a win against St. Mary's in the bracket buster (something I think we all agree needs to come back, but won't because the high majors don't want it), Kent's resume wasn't awe-inspiring. ... A couple other nice wins against George Mason and Illinois State, but Kent did suffer three MAC losses. While Akron wouldn't have had any three wins as good as those three for Kent, we were talking about Akron going 18-0 in league play, not 13-3. So, there could have been some precedent there.

Whatever, nobody from the MAC is getting an at-large, but the argument that the MAC can never get a team an at-large unless they pick up some quality non-conference wins is short-sighted.

Once a MAC team goes 30-4 and misses, then I'll buy that there is no way a MAC team can get an at-large without some quality wins.
(This post was last modified: 03-07-2017 10:06 PM by Wadszip.)
03-07-2017 10:04 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
axeme Offline
Sage
*

Posts: 20,009
Joined: May 2002
Reputation: 125
I Root For: hoops
Location: Location: Location:

Folding@NCAAbbsDonatorsCrappiesCrappiesCrappiesCrappiesCrappies
Post: #52
RE: MAC Tournament Predictions 2017
(The MAC and the MVC are hardly equivalents.)

The list is long of mid majors without quality wins who get left out. The group you are describing virtually doesn't exist: 30-4 and no auto bid and no quality wins. I guess by plausible deniability you can believe that team would get a bid, but they shouldn't over teams that have shown they can beat ranked and tournament quality teams, even with a few more losses. I think the committee has been clear that teams who only beat up on weaker teams haven't shown enough.
03-07-2017 10:12 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
kreed5120 Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 2,080
Joined: Feb 2016
Reputation: 54
I Root For: Akron
Location:
Post: #53
RE: MAC Tournament Predictions 2017
(03-07-2017 10:12 PM)axeme Wrote:  (The MAC and the MVC are hardly equivalents.)

The list is long of mid majors without quality wins who get left out. The group you are describing virtually doesn't exist: 30-4 and no auto bid and no quality wins. I guess by plausible deniability you can believe that team would get a bid, but they shouldn't over teams that have shown they can beat ranked and tournament quality teams, even with a few more losses. I think the committee has been clear that teams who only beat up on weaker teams haven't shown enough.

If beating up on "weaker teams" was as easy as you make it sound then why don't we see 30 win MAC teams and why has no MAC team ever gone 16-0 or 18-0 in conference play? Going 18-0 in the MAC > going 9-9 in B1G/ACC.
(This post was last modified: 03-07-2017 11:10 PM by kreed5120.)
03-07-2017 11:01 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
axeme Offline
Sage
*

Posts: 20,009
Joined: May 2002
Reputation: 125
I Root For: hoops
Location: Location: Location:

Folding@NCAAbbsDonatorsCrappiesCrappiesCrappiesCrappiesCrappies
Post: #54
RE: MAC Tournament Predictions 2017
(03-07-2017 11:01 PM)kreed5120 Wrote:  
(03-07-2017 10:12 PM)axeme Wrote:  (The MAC and the MVC are hardly equivalents.)

The list is long of mid majors without quality wins who get left out. The group you are describing virtually doesn't exist: 30-4 and no auto bid and no quality wins. I guess by plausible deniability you can believe that team would get a bid, but they shouldn't over teams that have shown they can beat ranked and tournament quality teams, even with a few more losses. I think the committee has been clear that teams who only beat up on weaker teams haven't shown enough.

If beating up on "weaker teams" was as easy as you make it sound then why don't we see 30 win MAC teams and why has no MAC team ever gone 16-0 or 18-0 in conference play? Going 18-0 in the MAC > going 9-9 in B1G/ACC.

Agreed that going 18-0 in the MAC > going 9-9 in B1G/ACC. Never even hinted that it wasn't. I said a team with a FEW more losses who has quality wins can be forgiven those losses. Akron would have been forgiven its losses to YSU and Miami if it had something to counter them with. It had nothing. You simply have to show you can beat tourney quality teams, especially when the other path is virtual (and heretofore impossible) perfection. That seems like a bad plan.

To me, Dambrot's biggest failing is his unwillingness to schedule tougher, especially when he has a good team. He seems to prefer quantity of wins over quality which is a losing strategy with the selection committee. It appears he won't ever learn that lesson.

Looking at at-large selection, it appears you need to schedule at least 5-6 teams that have the potential to be top 50 teams (it's not an exact science--you never know for sure how good future opponents will will be) and some solid mid-majors too, home and road. Then you have to be good enough to beat some of them.

And I am not one of those who think the MAC can never get an at-large just because it's the MAC. I think there is path. Mostly, it's been that MAC teams just haven't gotten it done OOC. Other times, it's that there is too much parity and the top teams rack up too many losses. This year, for Akron, it was both. No quality wins, and too many MAC teams of relatively equal strength.
03-08-2017 07:13 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
cleveland Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 1,965
Joined: Jan 2016
Reputation: 19
I Root For: basketball
Location:
Post: #55
RE: MAC Tournament Predictions 2017
(03-08-2017 07:13 AM)axeme Wrote:  
(03-07-2017 11:01 PM)kreed5120 Wrote:  
(03-07-2017 10:12 PM)axeme Wrote:  (The MAC and the MVC are hardly equivalents.)

The list is long of mid majors without quality wins who get left out. The group you are describing virtually doesn't exist: 30-4 and no auto bid and no quality wins. I guess by plausible deniability you can believe that team would get a bid, but they shouldn't over teams that have shown they can beat ranked and tournament quality teams, even with a few more losses. I think the committee has been clear that teams who only beat up on weaker teams haven't shown enough.

If beating up on "weaker teams" was as easy as you make it sound then why don't we see 30 win MAC teams and why has no MAC team ever gone 16-0 or 18-0 in conference play? Going 18-0 in the MAC > going 9-9 in B1G/ACC.

Agreed that going 18-0 in the MAC > going 9-9 in B1G/ACC. Never even hinted that it wasn't. I said a team with a FEW more losses who has quality wins can be forgiven those losses. Akron would have been forgiven its losses to YSU and Miami if it had something to counter them with. It had nothing. You simply have to show you can beat tourney quality teams, especially when the other path is virtual (and heretofore impossible) perfection. That seems like a bad plan.

To me, Dambrot's biggest failing is his unwillingness to schedule tougher, especially when he has a good team. He seems to prefer quantity of wins over quality which is a losing strategy with the selection committee. It appears he won't ever learn that lesson.

Looking at at-large selection, it appears you need to schedule at least 5-6 teams that have the potential to be top 50 teams (it's not an exact science--you never know for sure how good future opponents will will be) and some solid mid-majors too, home and road. Then you have to be good enough to beat some of them.

And I am not one of those who think the MAC can never get an at-large just because it's the MAC. I think there is path. Mostly, it's been that MAC teams just haven't gotten it done OOC. Other times, it's that there is too much parity and the top teams rack up too many losses. This year, for Akron, it was both. No quality wins, and too many MAC teams of relatively equal strength.

In hindsight ... just about any Charlie Coles/Miami schedule is what GOOD MAC teams should be looking at ... that said, again based on hindsight ... the highest MAC seed in the NCAA Tournament was the 2008 Kent State team (8/9 game) ... that non-con schedule should also be investigated.

Finally .. as each season goes by since its demise, the loss of BracketBusters has been a huge setback for MAC level teams. HUGE!.
03-08-2017 07:59 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
UAZippers Offline
Water Engineer
*

Posts: 45
Joined: Jan 2016
Reputation: 0
I Root For: Akron
Location:
Post: #56
RE: MAC Tournament Predictions 2017
(03-07-2017 10:12 PM)axeme Wrote:  (The MAC and the MVC are hardly equivalents.)


To me, Dambrot's biggest failing is his unwillingness to schedule tougher, especially when he has a good team. He seems to prefer quantity of wins over quality which is a losing strategy with the selection committee. It appears he won't ever learn that lesson.

I agree that scheduling is what has annoyed me as an Akron fan, but recently Dambrot has tried to give his reasons for why it hasn't been better. As far as I can tell, it is mostly a pride thing. Dambrot claims that good team won't pay as much for a "buy" game vs Akron, because they have been consistently good and could potentially pull the upset. He says that he sees it as unfair for him to go on the road for less money than the other MAC teams just because he has done a good job. (I am not sure how much I believe in this personally, but he has said it in multiple interviews now.)

The other reason is that because the JAR is trash, quality mid-majors won't schedule a home-home with Akron. If i remember right, Dambrot specifically called out Dayton and Cincinnati as two teams that straight up will not come to the JAR.
03-08-2017 08:15 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
OUVan Offline
Special Teams
*

Posts: 862
Joined: Oct 2002
Reputation: 8
I Root For: Ohio Bobcats
Location: Bethesda, MD
Post: #57
RE: MAC Tournament Predictions 2017
(03-08-2017 08:15 AM)UAZippers Wrote:  The other reason is that because the JAR is trash, quality mid-majors won't schedule a home-home with Akron. If i remember right, Dambrot specifically called out Dayton and Cincinnati as two teams that straight up will not come to the JAR.

There are plenty of other consistently good mids that will do home-and-homes though. The MAC's biggest problem with scheduling IMO is not the lack of P5s on the schedule. It's too many 200+ RPI/KenPom/Sagarin teams on the schedule. Here is a breakdown of each team's 200+ schedule with the non-D1 games in parentheses.

Akron - 6 (1)
Ohio - 7 (1)
Buffalo - 4 (2)
Kent St - 6 (1)
BGSU - 6 (1)
Miami - 5 (1)
Ball St - 9 (1)
WMU - 5 (1)
Toledo - 3 (1)
NIU - 8 (3)
EMU - 2 (4)
CMU - 6 (2)

Every team except Toledo had 6 crap games on their schedules and the conference lost 15 of those games. I love Toledo's schedule although I would like to see one or two neutral court (tournament) games against P5 teams. They don't necessarily help you in the mathematics but they do add eye candy for the talking heads.
03-08-2017 09:15 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
kreed5120 Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 2,080
Joined: Feb 2016
Reputation: 54
I Root For: Akron
Location:
Post: #58
RE: MAC Tournament Predictions 2017
(03-08-2017 07:13 AM)axeme Wrote:  
(03-07-2017 11:01 PM)kreed5120 Wrote:  
(03-07-2017 10:12 PM)axeme Wrote:  (The MAC and the MVC are hardly equivalents.)

The list is long of mid majors without quality wins who get left out. The group you are describing virtually doesn't exist: 30-4 and no auto bid and no quality wins. I guess by plausible deniability you can believe that team would get a bid, but they shouldn't over teams that have shown they can beat ranked and tournament quality teams, even with a few more losses. I think the committee has been clear that teams who only beat up on weaker teams haven't shown enough.

If beating up on "weaker teams" was as easy as you make it sound then why don't we see 30 win MAC teams and why has no MAC team ever gone 16-0 or 18-0 in conference play? Going 18-0 in the MAC > going 9-9 in B1G/ACC.

Agreed that going 18-0 in the MAC > going 9-9 in B1G/ACC. Never even hinted that it wasn't. I said a team with a FEW more losses who has quality wins can be forgiven those losses. Akron would have been forgiven its losses to YSU and Miami if it had something to counter them with. It had nothing. You simply have to show you can beat tourney quality teams, especially when the other path is virtual (and heretofore impossible) perfection. That seems like a bad plan.

To me, Dambrot's biggest failing is his unwillingness to schedule tougher, especially when he has a good team. He seems to prefer quantity of wins over quality which is a losing strategy with the selection committee. It appears he won't ever learn that lesson.

Looking at at-large selection, it appears you need to schedule at least 5-6 teams that have the potential to be top 50 teams (it's not an exact science--you never know for sure how good future opponents will will be) and some solid mid-majors too, home and road. Then you have to be good enough to beat some of them.

And I am not one of those who think the MAC can never get an at-large just because it's the MAC. I think there is path. Mostly, it's been that MAC teams just haven't gotten it done OOC. Other times, it's that there is too much parity and the top teams rack up too many losses. This year, for Akron, it was both. No quality wins, and too many MAC teams of relatively equal strength.

I agree that the best path for an at-large for a MAC team is to schedule and more importantly beat a few top 50 teams. I never said it wasn't. All I said was a MAC team that did go 18-0 and finished with 30 wins would make the tournament. Reaching both those totals would be near impossible feats.

Dambrot definitely could have done more to improve the schedule, but mid-major scheduling just isn't as easy as it once was. The year Miami got their at-large bid both Dayton and Tennessee came to Millett. In today's world neither of those teams would ever agree to come play at Akron. The only way to face those teams outside of being fortunate enough to be invited to a tournament that has them is to go on the road and play them. And that's only if they're willing to have you. A lot of programs have no desire to play Akron as the reward for winning < risk of losing.

This Akron team rightfully so is nowhere close to being on the bubble. Even a win over Creighton wouldn't have changed the fact they lost to BG, YSU, and Miami.
03-08-2017 09:16 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
kreed5120 Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 2,080
Joined: Feb 2016
Reputation: 54
I Root For: Akron
Location:
Post: #59
RE: MAC Tournament Predictions 2017
(03-08-2017 09:15 AM)OUVan Wrote:  
(03-08-2017 08:15 AM)UAZippers Wrote:  The other reason is that because the JAR is trash, quality mid-majors won't schedule a home-home with Akron. If i remember right, Dambrot specifically called out Dayton and Cincinnati as two teams that straight up will not come to the JAR.

There are plenty of other consistently good mids that will do home-and-homes though. The MAC's biggest problem with scheduling IMO is not the lack of P5s on the schedule. It's too many 200+ RPI/KenPom/Sagarin teams on the schedule. Here is a breakdown of each team's 200+ schedule with the non-D1 games in parentheses.

Akron - 6 (1)
Ohio - 7 (1)
Buffalo - 4 (2)
Kent St - 6 (1)
BGSU - 6 (1)
Miami - 5 (1)
Ball St - 9 (1)
WMU - 5 (1)
Toledo - 3 (1)
NIU - 8 (3)
EMU - 2 (4)
CMU - 6 (2)

Every team except Toledo had 6 crap games on their schedules and the conference lost 15 of those games. I love Toledo's schedule although I would like to see one or two neutral court (tournament) games against P5 teams. They don't necessarily help you in the mathematics but they do add eye candy for the talking heads.

I definitely agree this is probably the most obtainable way for MAC teams to improve their schedule without putting themselves at a huge disadvantage. I'd be all for the MAC improving the quality of its buy games (buy more Horizon and OVC teams and fewer SWAC/MEAC teams) and agree to more home and homes with quality mid-majors. In fact, since they took bracketbusters away from us it would be great if every year in mid-February some sort of scheduling alignment was agreed to between the MAC and CAA where our #1 team would play their #1 team and so on.
03-08-2017 09:32 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
pennies4everybody Offline
Special Teams
*

Posts: 518
Joined: Jan 2005
Reputation: 0
I Root For: Ball U
Location:
Post: #60
RE: MAC Tournament Predictions 2017
(03-08-2017 07:59 AM)cleveland Wrote:  the highest MAC seed in the NCAA Tournament was the 2008 Kent State team (8/9 game) ...

FWIW, BSU was a #9 seed in 1989 as well... that team was 29-3 (only losses to Ohio, Toledo, and #3 ranked Illinois in the tournament), with wins over Purdue, Northwestern, and Minnesota, but also wins over powerhouses US International, Florida International, Florida A&M, and Texas State. The team had a 14-2 conference record and were ranked #18 by the AP. That team won in the first round over Pitt, but lost to Illinois in the 2nd round. For comparison, the 1990 team had no standout quality wins (losses against Purdue and a #15 ranked Memphis), a 26-7 record, a 13-3 conference record, was not ranked, and only earned a #12 seed. Of course, that team went to the Sweet 16 (wins over #22 ranked Oregon St. and #16 ranked Louisville) and only lost to eventual champion and #2 ranked UNLV by 2.
(This post was last modified: 03-08-2017 02:33 PM by pennies4everybody.)
03-08-2017 01:13 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply 




User(s) browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)


Copyright © 2002-2024 Collegiate Sports Nation Bulletin Board System (CSNbbs), All Rights Reserved.
CSNbbs is an independent fan site and is in no way affiliated to the NCAA or any of the schools and conferences it represents.
This site monetizes links. FTC Disclosure.
We allow third-party companies to serve ads and/or collect certain anonymous information when you visit our web site. These companies may use non-personally identifiable information (e.g., click stream information, browser type, time and date, subject of advertisements clicked or scrolled over) during your visits to this and other Web sites in order to provide advertisements about goods and services likely to be of greater interest to you. These companies typically use a cookie or third party web beacon to collect this information. To learn more about this behavioral advertising practice or to opt-out of this type of advertising, you can visit http://www.networkadvertising.org.
Powered By MyBB, © 2002-2024 MyBB Group.