I'm not into this debate, but if folks want to use a simple metric, one can use the Sagarin ratings for comparing teams from different seasons.
They go back to 2002/3 season so it is an imprecise metric but at least it is a metric.
BTW, when I look at trying to judge the validity of computerized rankings I try to find a criterion to compare it. I look at how the teams in a conference in a team is ranked 'by the computer' and how I'd say most 'experts' would rank them.
What does the Sagarins have to say about the 2017/8 MAC teams:
1). UB is defintely the highest ranked team,
2). TOL and EMU are second and third best. The difference between them isn't much.
3). The 'weak sisters' are teams like NIU, BG, Akron, etc. Only Akron of the bottom four made it to CLE. None advanced to the semis.
https://www.usatoday.com/sports/ncaab/sa...onference/
Based on that I'd say the validity of the Sagarin computerized rankings are as good any human can do by watching dozens and dozens of MAC games.
I thought at the end EMU is/was a better team than TOL, but TOL won in the last 10 seconds Friday in CLE so they can say they were MAC #2. EMU won two of three from TOL but lost the game which counts the most which obviously suggests TOL and EMU are very close in ability.