This can be summed up in 2 phrases:
Miami shouldn't lose in a late season game to MARSHALL.
Buffalo shouldn't blow a 19 point lead in the biggest game of the year.
If either of those teams took care of business, you guys wouldn't be looking at this problem. It may not be fair, but the point is that Miami and Buffalo had the bids in their reach and let them slip away.
Was Buffalo deserving? Probably. But the last thing the committee saw of them was the Bulls let an overmatched Ohio team crawl back from 19 down in the most pivital game of the season to win.
Ohio's win was a tribute to Ohio's play, not Buffalo folding. Once OU tied the game, UB hung tight the rest of the way. That's far different from just being blown out altogether.
But we've all been here before. We've been here talking about conspiracy and letter-writing campaigns before. BG has been snubbed twice with an excellent record and quality wins. Ball State got nothing for beating Kansas and UCLA and then posting 20 wins. Toledo got hosed with high rpi. The only difference this year was the rpis were up across the board, offering false hope.
NOTHING is going to change until Chryst gets a quality PR firm to get the word out in the major media markets about the MAC. Media voices need to treat the conference like a legitimate force.
When Duke loses at Va Tech, it just shows how tough the ACC is. But when MAC teams go on the road and lose in conference, they are toast. The quality records of MAC teams this year in a mediocre year across the country should have accounted for TWO bids at least. Period.
I think some of you are right in that the committee didn't do enough research on the MAc and with taking nothing away from Ohio it probably didn't look good that the team picked to come in last in the east won the conference... The committee sees that and says how good is this conference actually.. They don't know anything about the MAC like we all do...
BTW... RICK CHRYST WILL NEVER DO ANYTHING.. I DON'T THINK THAT MAN DOES ANY WORK
How many times have MAC teams pulled out to 15 point leads and then lost in the MAC this year. It's how the conference works. It happened in almost every single Ball State game.
It's because the teams are so close, yet employ different stratagies.
Northern Iowa and Iowa State did not deserve to be in. Iowa is a grey area. UAB had a good post season. Iowa State lost three in a row near the end of the season, and what did they do in post season? They beat Baylor.
And yes, Miami lost to Marshall...in Marshall's final home MAC game. Don't tell me that Marshall didn't want to win that game.
And, yes, West Virginia is in.
Please.
Well to be fair, I personally believe that WVU did deserve to get in. They started the season 10-0, until they got trounced by 38 points at Villanova. Then after a win over St. John's, they lost by 4 points in a major upset to Marshall, and prettymuch went on a skid during which many probably thought their season was essentially over. But they really pulled it together toward the end of the season, especially with a sweep of Pitt, and then a remarkable postseason run in the BE tourney by knocking off Providence, and then upsetting BC and Villanova (what got them all that attention at a pivotal time and likely what got them in) until finally being knocked off by Syracuse. They really pulled it together toward the end and so I believe they really earned their spot. Looking at UNI's schedule however, I could see where alot of people's doubts may be coming from. Their most impressive wins seemed to be over Iowa State, SIU, and WMU. Only Creighton was able to beat them twice last season as well, which I suppose had to have counted for something. But their overall record was only 1 overall game worse than Buffalo's, and the only apparent weakness in their schedule was early on. They still finished the season very strongly and impressively (except for the heartbreaking loss in the MACC), and so I definitely agree they had a strong case to be in the tourney. Miami(OH) surged through most of the season, but some stumbling toward the end is what likely hurt their case. The MAC was really competitive this past season, and it seems the lack of obviously dominant teams may have hurt some of our schools' chances of impressing enough people to get at-large bids. I'll be rooting for Ohio this year, and I hope they make it as far as possible to represent the MAC as best as they can! Goodluck this tourney, Bobcats! :)
The Knight Time Wrote:Was Buffalo deserving? Probably. But the last thing the committee saw of them was the Bulls let an overmatched Ohio team crawl back from 19 down in the most pivital game of the season to win.
So if Buffalo is too much for Ohio to handle.......
Why did Ohio win all three meetings against Buffalo this season?
Why did Ohio play poorly but still managed to overcome double digit deficits in to beat Buffalo every time they played them?
We beat Buffalo three times, and nearly did the same to Miami this season. We lost on a last second shot to the Redhawks on the road early in the season and soundly defeated them twice later in the season.
We don't crawl.......we play defense.
BullBoy Wrote:BTW... RICK CHRYST WILL NEVER DO ANYTHING.. I DON'T THINK THAT MAN DOES ANY WORK
You still have to think that overall, the MAC has certainly progressed since Chryst has been running the show. That comment is an unnecessary jab at a pretty decent guy that does a pretty decent job.
Certainly there should be some other way to do this - perhaps a B.S. computerized system that doesn't work, like what is used in football is in order. At least then, we would all KNOW why our conference was getting raped.
'chryst needs pr firm to let major media know about MAC. ' that's why he wants to expand
Add to this crap the blinding insight from Brent Mushmouther when WMU was schooling Marquette at the Bradley Center last night:
Quote: Well, if this is any indication of the quality of basketball played in the MAC, they deserve some recognition NEXT YEAR
Really?
Fightin Florida Gators 83, Ohio Bobcats 68!!!
FalconFan1999 Wrote:I'm totally with you Vandelay! A sports talk guy out of Cleveland Kenny Roda, today was talking about the MAC getting shafted. One of his callers made a great point. That is the MAC should take the NCAA selection committee to court. The selection process is too subjective. It needs to be objective. People will still complain, but at least the reasons for exclusion would be legitamate. Go Bobcats, eat Gator!
This happens every year and has for over a decade. This just happens to be the MAC turn in the barrel. There is no basis in law in taking this to court, that just can't happen! If it could a whole lot bigger name schools would have done so long ago!!
IULurker Wrote:I firmly believe one of the reasons the MAC did not get multiple bids is because less time and energy was spent by the committee researching the MAC schools compared to schools in the MVC, CUSA, WAC, etc. When only a few slots remained, the committee knew more about the teams in these others conferences and their strengths, and all they knew about Miami and Buffalo were their failings.
BTW, I accidently posted this on another thread, sorry for making you read twice.
One other point that needs to be emphasized, is that consideration is also given to a team's traveling fans. The NCAA is a whole lot about money and we just have to live with that. They apparently felt that other schools would send more fans.
I find this not something to get too worked up about.
Fans have nothing to do with it. The sites basically sell out every year regardless of who is there. The NCAA money is already in the bag and mostly comes from the TV deal anyway.
You think they picked UAB because they would send more fans to Boise than Buffalo? Right.
FalconFan1999 Wrote:I'm totally with you Vandelay! A sports talk guy out of Cleveland Kenny Roda, today was talking about the MAC getting shafted. One of his callers made a great point. That is the MAC should take the NCAA selection committee to court. The selection process is too subjective. It needs to be objective.
I have argued for this for both bball and fball for years.
An OBJECTIVE set of criteria (say if you win 22 games, you're in) would do wonders. People will complain about a weak schedule, well you know what? G'town and others have been doing that for years! If the mid-level "power" conference members are really worried about a Davidson or a St Marys getting in, then they will *play* them!
It solves everybody's problem and gives good games.
Gatorama Wrote:IULurker Wrote:I firmly believe one of the reasons the MAC did not get multiple bids is because less time and energy was spent by the committee researching the MAC schools compared to schools in the MVC, CUSA, WAC, etc. When only a few slots remained, the committee knew more about the teams in these others conferences and their strengths, and all they knew about Miami and Buffalo were their failings.
BTW, I accidently posted this on another thread, sorry for making you read twice.
One other point that needs to be emphasized, is that consideration is also given to a team's traveling fans. The NCAA is a whole lot about money and we just have to live with that. They apparently felt that other schools would send more fans.
I find this not something to get too worked up about.
Fans are not a consideration. The tournament is paid for.
Lobbying the committee is not a consideration, either.
Now, granted, if your school have a friend on the inside, that seems to help sometimes. (To wit: the Des Moines Area Community College nearly getting a bid).
But no PR push from any outsider is going to make a difference
The Knight Time Wrote:This can be summed up in 2 phrases:
Miami shouldn't lose in a late season game to MARSHALL.
Buffalo shouldn't blow a 19 point lead in the biggest game of the year.
If either of those teams took care of business, you guys wouldn't be looking at this problem. It may not be fair, but the point is that Miami and Buffalo had the bids in their reach and let them slip away.
Was Buffalo deserving? Probably. But the last thing the committee saw of them was the Bulls let an overmatched Ohio team crawl back from 19 down in the most pivital game of the season to win.
If you really want to nitpick reasons why a team didn't make it, you can tear apart Northern Iowa, UAB, Iowa and many others this year. No team is perfect. Miami and Buffalo had their faults. That's college basketball. The problem is that the committee doesn't respect MAC play, therefore for example, when Miami beats WMU or UB beats Akron it's no big deal to them. I mean if they don't respect the MAC, they are not going to put alot of weight into what we think is a Big win over a rival.. The committee probably looks more favorably on a team like UAB LOSING close games to Cinci or Louiville than MAC members winning MAC games. It's really sad. I don't know what they can do to fix it other than expand the field or make a seperate "bubble bracket"....kind of like the play-in game now but include 6 or 8 totally at-large teams.
Does anyone know or have a list of all those who are on this committee? Also, we know Kent's AD is on next year's committee. Who else is on it? We should prepare now for next year.
Kit-Cat Wrote:Shrakkrocket Wrote:brahmag Wrote:The MAC is quickly becoming the My A** Complains conference. I really don't think the MAC deserved multiple teams. Teams did not play up to their level. That's why Ohio won in the first place. Buffalo blew a 19-point lead. Miami blew games, too. If you can't win at Marshall, maybe you should be forced to win your conference tournament to get in. Let's not deny the conference tournament really is an extention of the NCAA Tournament. You just get a second chance based on your credibility with the selection committee.
Although I will say winning the regular-season conference title should mean more than it does.
you reek of ignorance, get out of here
Alternative opinions are not accepted on this board.
Still smarting because we disagreed with your assertions that bin Laden is a good guy? :rolleyes:
brahmag Wrote:If you can't win at Marshall, maybe you should be forced to win your conference tournament to get in.
I guess by your incredible logic then West Virginia does belong in the tournament either, huh? And I am guessing that Marshall won AT West Virginia too!
Happy Kyne Wrote:Does anyone know or have a list of all those who are on this committee? Also, we know Kent's AD is on next year's committee. Who else is on it? We should prepare now for next year.
The selection committee (year term expires):
# Robert Bowlsby - Iowa AD (05) - Chairman--KSU AD Laing Kennedy replaces him, but a new chairman will be elected.
# Karl Benson - WAC Commissioner (06)
# Christopher Hill - Utah AD (09)
# Floyd Kerr - Southern AD (06)
# Jonathan LeCrone - Horizon Commissioner (08)
# Craig Littlepage - Virginia AD (07)
# Gerald Myers - Texas Tech AD (05)--don't know who is replacing him.
# Thomas O'Connor - George Mason AD (09)
# Mike Slive - SEC Commissioner (09)
# Gary Walters - Princeton AD (07)
When you look at this list, our predicament becomes more appalling: only the SEC, Big XII, ACC, and Big 10 are represented vs. 6 from the smaller conferences. Cross out the big 10 and replace with the MAC next year, and assuming they replace the Big XII guy with someone from a major conference, it will be 7-3 edge for the smaller conferences. Fat lot of good it has done the smaller conferences so far. :rolleyes: