CSNbbs

Full Version: Is This A Step Backward for the MAC?
You're currently viewing a stripped down version of our content. View the full version with proper formatting.
Pages: 1 2
Found this item from the Andy Katz blog on ESPN interesting...

Quote:Ohio coach Tim O'Shea is trying to rally his fellow MAC coaches to play 22 league games (up from 18 games). He was discussing the matter with Akron head coach Keith Dambrot and Toledo coach Stan Joplin, and O'Shea has them interested.

The reason is that everyone in the league is struggling to get games. O'Shea's plan locks in 11 home games for every team in the league, and local fans would rather see a game against a MAC team than some nonconference guarantee game.

Dambrot said he still needs a few games and had $70,000 for guarantees (to pay a team to come for a game without a return) and can't get any takers. Joplin said he has four games still to schedule.

The MAC has struggled to get multiple NCAA bids and is failing at convincing many of the high majors to play them, which would boost power ratings, so the consensus is that playing more conference games would provide a true champion and be better for the teams in the league.

Dambrot and Joplin said they were hoping that high majors will buckle as the summer wanes and be forced to go home-and-home. Ohio got one of those against Virginia a few years ago when the Cavaliers couldn't get a game late in the summer.

Meanwhile, Joplin said Toledo, Utah State and Saint Louis worked out a three-way deal. Joplin said Toledo will play at Saint Louis, Saint Louis will play at Utah State and Utah State will play at Toledo, giving all three a home game against a solid opponent. They will rotate next year.

In my opinion, this is a bad idea right now. If the MAC were at more parity in basketball and already at multiple bids, two games all around could work because the RPI of the top tier bid teams doesn't get hurt. ( MVC is case in point. This mid major has 2 pre season Top 25 teams and 4 NCAA teams to schedule against in conference next year.) But, sadly, the MAC is far from that quality. Playing everyone twice just hurts the top tier teams even if they win the games against the lower half. At this time, two all around keeps the league mired in mediocracy.

I don't blame the coaches for wanting an easy out, but this is where the MAC? It should step up and help out with scheduling. I thought we had a new BB guy who was supposed to be loaded with good ideas.

One final thought...according to the coaches logic stated above (including those from Toledo and Akron), the MAC does not have a true football champion because all teams don't play each other.
The logic behind not being a true champion is the unbalanced scheduled in basketball. The team who gets EMU and CMU as cross over games like Akron did last years is at an advantage of others in the same division who had to play stronger teams which.
earlier this year the MAC supposedly was considering going from 18 to 16 conference games so that the conference wouldn't keep beating itself up.

that supposedly was designed to enhance the chance of getting a 2nd bid.
Quote:The logic behind not being a true champion is the unbalanced scheduled in basketball. The team who gets EMU and CMU as cross over games like Akron did last years is at an advantage of others in the same division who had to play stronger teams which.

OBJ, wouldn't this be be true for football as well? The schedules are easier/tougher based on the cross division draws. It would appear that a 16 or 18 game conference schedule is enough to determine who has the best season.

EMU, I thought so as well. The logic was to stop beating up on each other and get some higher quality OOC games. Apparently, this is tougher than originally thought. This ideas just seems to be about filling up schedules.
Better OOC schedules are needed accross the board in the MAC. We have plenty of games to determine the MAC Champion. Not only that we have a great end of the regular season conference tournament at the Q.

I wouldn't change the way the MAC scheduling is set-up but I would push MAC schools to secure high profile major and mid-major schools to increase RPI.

I think this new guy is coming in trying to make a quick difference no matter what it is. Padding his resume for a fast move to something in his mind that will be bigger and better.

What a tool!
As best we've been able to piece it together so far, Miami's non-conference schedule will include the following:

HOME:
St. Louis (A10)
Michigan (B10)
Oakland (Horizon)
UIC (Horizon)

AWAY:
Kentucky (SEC)- Wednesday November 15th
Wright State (Horizon)**
Xavier (A10)
Dayton (A10) - Wednesday December 20th
Cincinnati (Big East) - Wednesday December 27th
Illinois State (MVC)
Bracketbuster

NEUTRAL:
Illinois (B10)
Rutgers (Big East)/Mississippi State (SEC)


** WSU was also scheduled for 11/15 and may have to be postponed if they can't find another date when both teams and the Nutter Center are available.

I guess I fail to see O'Shea's point. If anything, MAC teams would be better served with a 16-game conference schedule and more chances to build non-conference RPI. That's not fool-proof (as Miami's season in 2004-05 proved), but it's the best shot we have for multiple tourney bids.
DevilGrad Wrote:As best we've been able to piece it together so far, Miami's non-conference schedule will include the following:

HOME:
St. Louis (A10)
Michigan (B10)
Oakland (Horizon)
UIC (Horizon)

AWAY:
Kentucky (SEC)- Wednesday November 15th
Wright State (Horizon)**
Xavier (A10)
Dayton (A10) - Wednesday December 20th
Cincinnati (Big East) - Wednesday December 27th
Illinois State (MVC)
Bracketbuster

NEUTRAL:
Illinois (B10)
Rutgers (Big East)/Mississippi State (SEC)


** WSU was also scheduled for 11/15 and may have to be postponed if they can't find another date when both teams and the Nutter Center are available.

I guess I fail to see O'Shea's point. If anything, MAC teams would be better served with a 16-game conference schedule and more chances to build non-conference RPI. That's not fool-proof (as Miami's season in 2004-05 proved), but it's the best shot we have for multiple tourney bids.

You play Michigan at HOME? 04-jawdrop How did you manage that one? We play them in Michigan but I would love to see them play at the Convocenter.
That's quite a line up for Miami bow:. Maybe TOS should call Charlie for some scheduling lessons.

The scehdule for the Flashes is okay; wish we had more OOC games at home.

Home
Detroit
Temple
Youngstown State

Away
Tourney at Ohio State, with a chance at the Buckeyes
Duke
Butler
Texas A&M (CC)
Cleveland State
? Bracket Buster
Kent plays Texas A&M-Corpis Christi not the one in College Station.

Ohio schedule is much tougher too.
Home:
Rhode Island(A-10)
Marist (MAAC)
Yale (IVY)
Marshall (CUSA)

Nuetral
*Cincinnati (Big East)
#St Joseph's (A-10)
#UNC-Wilmington (CAA)
TBA at ASU tournament
away:
Samford (Ohio Valley)
St. Bonaventure (A-10)
Louisville (Big East)
Marshall (CUSA)
Arizona State (PAC Ten)
TBD Bracketbuster

# at Louisville
* Quicken Loans Arena

This is a schedule that will challange Ohio. Plenty of chances for quality wins and lots of road/neutral court games.
Quote:Kent plays Texas A&M-Corpis Christi not the one in College Station.

True.

I don't get it. If this is the Bobcts OOC schedule, what is TOS whining about? Doesn't he know beating Louisville or ASU away from the Convo will be much better for his RPI than thumping a bottom of the class MAC team at home?
RobertN Wrote:You play Michigan at HOME? 04-jawdrop How did you manage that one? We play them in Michigan but I would love to see them play at the Convocenter.

Bowling Green hosted Michigan three or five years ago (and won that particular game). I forget if it was a two-for-one or three-for-one deal.
WMU also hosted Michigan that same year that BG did and also won (2001-2002 season). It was an amazing atmosphere that night in Kalamazoo. I've been told Michigan does not want to come back cause of it and will only play WMU up in Grand Rapids on a neutral court if the game is not a home game for Michigan in Ann Arbor. WMU will not go for that.

Chickens!! Granted when WMU has won 4 of the last 6 meetings with Michigan, I guess that can't look too good for the UM fans perception of the program.
Multiple Bids:

* The MAC rarely get multiple bids because they don't deserve multiple bids. Usually the MAC has one at-large worthy team and that team has traditionally won the MAC tournament securing the automatic bid anyway. The MVC (posterboy for Mid-Major multiple bids) often has lesser team win the tournament, allowing their regular season winner to get an at-large. On a case by case basis, you can understand (for the most part) why MAC teams didn't get an at-large though some of us may have thought they deserved one. In the past 6 years, there have only been 3 teams in the Top 50 for RPI in the MAC that didn't get an at-large bid.

- 2005: Miami (#43). That's what happens when you lose your final regular season game to Marshall. Dumb.

- 2005: Buffalo (#45). Blow a huge lead in the final. I would had both Miami and Buffalo in over UAB and Iowa St., but I can understand why they didn't make it.

- 2000. Kent (#31). Ok, they got screwed. I'm still mad about that one. But the late season losses to Ohio killed them.

Scheduling:

* Again, I'll say this, but I don't understand why the MAC clubs don't collaborate to get better mid-major coming in. I mean, this is a problem for Ohio, but it's also a problem for SIU, Wisconsin-Milwaukee, etc. I don't understand why Ohio and Akron (or Kent and Miami, etc.) don't collaborate to identify a couple of top mid-major for a home and away deal. Say Creighton agrees to play at Akron and Ohio will play on the road, and Western Kentucky plays at Ohio and Akron travels to Western Kentucky. All teams get games against two quality opponents including one home game.
Quote:The MAC rarely get multiple bids because they don't deserve multiple bids.

Horsepucky.

A certain team was 21-10 in 2002, and had played the #9 ranked non-conference schedule in the nation, with wins over Kansas (Final Four team) and UCLA (Sweet 16), and close losses to Duke (consensus #1 team until they were upset in regional semis), Indiana (NCAA Runner-up), and Oklahoma State on the road. They were champions of one of their conference's two divisions. After being snubbed, they went on to beat St. Joe's and LSU on the road in the NIT.

A team with that resume "didn't deserve" a bid? Phooey.

(Hint: that team was BSU).

Ditto for BG that same year (won 24 games, got left out), and Ohio U. in 2000. And your rationalizations for Miami and Buffalo's omissions for 2005 don't hold water when you consider who received at-larges in their stead...
Papa Lou BSU Wrote:
Quote:The MAC rarely get multiple bids because they don't deserve multiple bids.

Horsepucky.

A certain team was 21-10 in 2002, and had played the #9 ranked non-conference schedule in the nation, with wins over Kansas (Final Four team) and UCLA (Sweet 16), and close losses to Duke (consensus #1 team until they were upset in regional semis), Indiana (NCAA Runner-up), and Oklahoma State on the road. They were champions of one of their conference's two divisions. After being snubbed, they went on to beat St. Joe's and LSU on the road in the NIT.

A team with that resume "didn't deserve" a bid? Phooey.

(Hint: that team was BSU).

Ditto for BG that same year (won 24 games, got left out), and Ohio U. in 2000. And your rationalizations for Miami and Buffalo's omissions for 2005 don't hold water when you consider who received at-larges in their stead...

Ball St. (2002) - RPI #78. 5 losses to sub-100 RPI teams. Finished tied for a distant second in the conference. The good of the first weekend was totally undone by the rest of the year. This team didn't deserve a bid.

BG (2002) - RPI #59. One top 25 win and 4 sub-100 RPI losses. Distant second in conference. Bubble team for sure, but it's pretty easy to see why they got left out.

Ohio (2000) - You've got to be kidding me. 20-13 and an RPI of #73. You can make a much better argument for BG this year (along with Kent).

Listen, I agree with you on the 2005 bids. My last bracket had Buffalo and Miami both in among the last 4 at-larges. But I can understand why they got left out as well. Miami could have finished 13-5 and win the conference by 2 games. That probably would have locked it in, but they blew the Marshall game and then quickly bombed out the MAC tournament. Buffalo played fine basketball and would have been a better choice than UAB, but they were definitely on the fringe.

My point is that the perception is that the MAC is getting screwed out of multiple bids is a falicy. The only team in the last 6 years that I think was truly screwed out of a bid was the 2000 Kent team. There are only two other teams (Buffalo and Miami in 2005; maybe BG in 2000), that were strong bubble teams. The rest really weren't that close.
RobertN Wrote:You play Michigan at HOME? 04-jawdrop How did you manage that one? We play them in Michigan but I would love to see them play at the Convocenter.

I think it helps when the AD is a Michigan alum.
Flashboski Wrote:WMU also hosted Michigan that same year that BG did and also won (2001-2002 season). It was an amazing atmosphere that night in Kalamazoo. I've been told Michigan does not want to come back cause of it and will only play WMU up in Grand Rapids on a neutral court if the game is not a home game for Michigan in Ann Arbor. WMU will not go for that.

Why not? That sounds like a halfway decent idea to me.

St. Bonaventure plays a game each year in either Buffalo's HSBC Arena or at Rochester's War Memorial. They get very good crowds and help connect to these markets. (Olean, N.Y. isn't near much of anything).

If Lima had an arena, I'd be all for Bowling Green playing a hockey or basketball game there, just to see if it works -- and doing it annually if it did.
Schadenfreude Wrote:
Flashboski Wrote:WMU also hosted Michigan that same year that BG did and also won (2001-2002 season). It was an amazing atmosphere that night in Kalamazoo. I've been told Michigan does not want to come back cause of it and will only play WMU up in Grand Rapids on a neutral court if the game is not a home game for Michigan in Ann Arbor. WMU will not go for that.

Why not? That sounds like a halfway decent idea to me.

St. Bonaventure plays a game each year in either Buffalo's HSBC Arena or at Rochester's War Memorial. They get very good crowds and help connect to these markets. (Olean, N.Y. isn't near much of anything).

If Lima had an arena, I'd be all for Bowling Green playing a hockey or basketball game there, just to see if it works -- and doing it annually if it did.

Slima is a dyed in the wool OSU town........

I would try to boost interest in Findlay which is much closer to the BG orbit....
Quote:Ball St. (2002) - RPI #78. 5 losses to sub-100 RPI teams. Finished tied for a distant second in the conference. The good of the first weekend was totally undone by the rest of the year. This team didn't deserve a bid.

BG (2002) - RPI #59. One top 25 win and 4 sub-100 RPI losses. Distant second in conference. Bubble team for sure, but it's pretty easy to see why they got left out.

Ohio (2000) - You've got to be kidding me. 20-13 and an RPI of #73. You can make a much better argument for BG this year (along with Kent).

First of all, BSU's RPI was in the 40s during Championship Week in 2002, so I'm not sure where you're getting that data. And since the NCAA threw out that old RPI formula, it's pretty clear that BSU's numbers would have been even higer under the current system.

In 2000, our conference was ridiculously strong... I think we were seventh overall in conference power ratings at one point during the final week of the season. The league was so deep that our *10th-place* team (NIU) beat a Final Four participant (Wisconsin) that year.

But maybe you can explain why a 16-13 team from a BCS league is more deserving than the teams I mentioned above... Or why a 25-win Butler team took the same tailpipe in 2002, despite an even better resume than the two MAC teams that got hosed.

Those teams were screwed out of deserved at-large bids. Period.

My original point stands: Put any BCS conference team name on BSU's resume in '02 (or any of the above teams mentioned), and they not only get in the Dance, they get in easily.

Anyone who says otherwise is filled with the myopia of watching too many Big Ten games and too much ESPN.
Schadenfreude Wrote:
Flashboski Wrote:WMU also hosted Michigan that same year that BG did and also won (2001-2002 season). It was an amazing atmosphere that night in Kalamazoo. I've been told Michigan does not want to come back cause of it and will only play WMU up in Grand Rapids on a neutral court if the game is not a home game for Michigan in Ann Arbor. WMU will not go for that.

Why not? That sounds like a halfway decent idea to me.

St. Bonaventure plays a game each year in either Buffalo's HSBC Arena or at Rochester's War Memorial. They get very good crowds and help connect to these markets. (Olean, N.Y. isn't near much of anything).

If Lima had an arena, I'd be all for Bowling Green playing a hockey or basketball game there, just to see if it works -- and doing it annually if it did.

I'd love to see UB copy St. Bona and have a game in Rochester to try and jump start their fan base here. Tons of alumni who went to school when UB hoops still sucked, they need to be reminded UB has a good program, one that's cureently lightyears ahead of St. Bona.

I also wish KSU pushed for a 2 for 1 with Duke with the home game at the Q. I really like that OU and Cincy are playing their this upcoming season. The MAC needs to be creative, 99% of the time a big name opponette is not coming to a MAC gym.
Pages: 1 2
Reference URL's