CSNbbs

Akron 9-0
Ohio 7-1
WMU 7-2
Toledo 6-3
EMU 4-4
BGSU 4-5
Kent St 3-6
Buffalo 3-6
NIU 3-6
Miami 3-6
Ball St 2-7
CMU 2-7

This is incorrect.

MAC tournament seeding as of 2/5
1. Akron- bye to semis vs EMU or BGSU
2. Ohio- bye to semis vs WMU/NIU/CMU
3. WMU- bye to quarters vs CMU/NIU
4. EMU- bye to quarters vs Miami/Ball St
5. BGSU- bye to quarters vs Kent St/Buffalo
6. NIU- vs CMU in round one
7. Miami- vs Ball St in round one
8. KSU vs Buffalo in round one
9. UB vs Kent St in round one
10. Ball St vs Miami in round one
11. CMU vs NIU in round one

*Toledo would be 4th seed if eligible. Nice perk for the #1 seed as the MAC as its a big drop after Toledo.

I dont think thats right OBJ, think we have a new format this year. AKron and OHIO to Semis, wmu and emu to quarters,bg has a bye to the 2nd round, and the bottem 6 will play in the 1st round

Honestly, only the top 8 should even be in the conference tournament.

Top two get a bye to the semifinals. Next three get a bye to the quarterfinals.

(02-06-2013 11:56 PM)NIU007 Wrote: [ -> ]Honestly, only the top 8 should even be in the conference tournament.

That's the great part about a tournament. That is, that if what you say is true, it doesn't matter that those bottom teams are in it, because they have no chance of winning.

(02-07-2013 08:10 AM)JSF Wrote: [ -> ]Top two get a bye to the semifinals. Next three get a bye to the quarterfinals.

Almost right. There are 2 rounds before the quarterfinals. The 5 seed actually gets a bye to the second round, not to the quarterfinals.

(02-07-2013 08:47 AM)eich41 Wrote: [ -> ]

(02-06-2013 11:56 PM)NIU007 Wrote: [ -> ]Honestly, only the top 8 should even be in the conference tournament.

That's the great part about a tournament. That is, that if what you say is true, it doesn't matter that those bottom teams are in it, because they have no chance of winning.

I just think the regular season doesn't mean enough, if winning just gets you a better seed, and even the bottom teams can suddenly play lights out for a couple games in the tournament and knock off a good team. And I say that as a fan of a team that most likely wouldn't make the tournament in that scenario.

(02-07-2013 10:33 AM)NIU007 Wrote: [ -> ]

(02-07-2013 08:47 AM)eich41 Wrote: [ -> ]

(02-06-2013 11:56 PM)NIU007 Wrote: [ -> ]Honestly, only the top 8 should even be in the conference tournament.

That's the great part about a tournament. That is, that if what you say is true, it doesn't matter that those bottom teams are in it, because they have no chance of winning.

I just think the regular season doesn't mean enough, if winning just gets you a better seed, and even the bottom teams can suddenly play lights out for a couple games in the tournament and knock off a good team. And I say that as a fan of a team that most likely wouldn't make the tournament in that scenario.

Regular season means a ton in the MAC Tournament. Get a top 4 seed and you only have to win 2 or 3 games to get the auto bid. Get a 5 seed and you have to win 4 games. Get a 6-11 seed and you have to win 5 games to get the auto bid. That is a huge difference!

The regular season is awarded disproportionately in the MAC.

(02-07-2013 10:57 AM)EA3 Wrote: [ -> ]

(02-07-2013 10:33 AM)NIU007 Wrote: [ -> ]

(02-07-2013 08:47 AM)eich41 Wrote: [ -> ]

(02-06-2013 11:56 PM)NIU007 Wrote: [ -> ]Honestly, only the top 8 should even be in the conference tournament.

That's the great part about a tournament. That is, that if what you say is true, it doesn't matter that those bottom teams are in it, because they have no chance of winning.

I just think the regular season doesn't mean enough, if winning just gets you a better seed, and even the bottom teams can suddenly play lights out for a couple games in the tournament and knock off a good team. And I say that as a fan of a team that most likely wouldn't make the tournament in that scenario.

Regular season means a ton in the MAC Tournament. Get a top 4 seed and you only have to win 2 or 3 games to get the auto bid. Get a 5 seed and you have to win 4 games. Get a 6-11 seed and you have to win 5 games to get the auto bid. That is a huge difference!

The regular season is awarded disproportionately in the MAC.

I guess you have a point, it just seems strange seeing the bottom teams in the tournament.

(02-07-2013 10:57 AM)EA3 Wrote: [ -> ]

(02-07-2013 10:33 AM)NIU007 Wrote: [ -> ]

(02-07-2013 08:47 AM)eich41 Wrote: [ -> ]

(02-06-2013 11:56 PM)NIU007 Wrote: [ -> ]Honestly, only the top 8 should even be in the conference tournament.

That's the great part about a tournament. That is, that if what you say is true, it doesn't matter that those bottom teams are in it, because they have no chance of winning.

I just think the regular season doesn't mean enough, if winning just gets you a better seed, and even the bottom teams can suddenly play lights out for a couple games in the tournament and knock off a good team. And I say that as a fan of a team that most likely wouldn't make the tournament in that scenario.

Regular season means a ton in the MAC Tournament. Get a top 4 seed and you only have to win 2 or 3 games to get the auto bid. Get a 5 seed and you have to win 4 games. Get a 6-11 seed and you have to win 5 games to get the auto bid. That is a huge difference!

The regular season is awarded disproportionately in the MAC.

I would say they finally reward the regular season appropriately. It should be huge to be one of the top two. You should be penalized for having a lousy season and not just get to wipe the slate clean.

(02-07-2013 11:20 AM)axeme Wrote: [ -> ]

(02-07-2013 10:57 AM)EA3 Wrote: [ -> ]

(02-07-2013 10:33 AM)NIU007 Wrote: [ -> ]

(02-07-2013 08:47 AM)eich41 Wrote: [ -> ]

(02-06-2013 11:56 PM)NIU007 Wrote: [ -> ]Honestly, only the top 8 should even be in the conference tournament.

That's the great part about a tournament. That is, that if what you say is true, it doesn't matter that those bottom teams are in it, because they have no chance of winning.

I just think the regular season doesn't mean enough, if winning just gets you a better seed, and even the bottom teams can suddenly play lights out for a couple games in the tournament and knock off a good team. And I say that as a fan of a team that most likely wouldn't make the tournament in that scenario.

Regular season means a ton in the MAC Tournament. Get a top 4 seed and you only have to win 2 or 3 games to get the auto bid. Get a 5 seed and you have to win 4 games. Get a 6-11 seed and you have to win 5 games to get the auto bid. That is a huge difference!

The regular season is awarded disproportionately in the MAC.

I would say they finally reward the regular season appropriately. It should be huge to be one of the top two. You should be penalized for having a lousy season and not just get to wipe the slate clean.

I agree with NIU...yeah, a bottom seed has to win more games, but its a very doable feat. When you get hot in a tournament, it can carry you a long way.

Having the knowledge that all teams can have a shot at the autobid, you can actually use that to your advantage. While some team works hard trying to win as many games as possible during the regular season, getting fatigued by the end and possibly sustaining injury, a "bottom" team could play just well enough to keep their legs and bodies good for the tournament and try to "turn it on" for the tournament.

Also, that top team has the pressure of being "rusty"...the same arguement is made about NBA teams that go the distance vice the team that wraps up fast and has to wait for their oppponent. No way to truly know which is better, but I'd rather play without a long layoff...

So being the top team may not really be rewarding...playing fewer games could possibly be detrimental; you could be knocked off in your first game!...the middle seeds actually are better off for our tournament...not too few and not too many...

(02-07-2013 11:44 AM)wleakr Wrote: [ -> ]

(02-07-2013 11:20 AM)axeme Wrote: [ -> ]

(02-07-2013 10:57 AM)EA3 Wrote: [ -> ]

(02-07-2013 10:33 AM)NIU007 Wrote: [ -> ]

(02-07-2013 08:47 AM)eich41 Wrote: [ -> ]That's the great part about a tournament. That is, that if what you say is true, it doesn't matter that those bottom teams are in it, because they have no chance of winning.

I just think the regular season doesn't mean enough, if winning just gets you a better seed, and even the bottom teams can suddenly play lights out for a couple games in the tournament and knock off a good team. And I say that as a fan of a team that most likely wouldn't make the tournament in that scenario.

Regular season means a ton in the MAC Tournament. Get a top 4 seed and you only have to win 2 or 3 games to get the auto bid. Get a 5 seed and you have to win 4 games. Get a 6-11 seed and you have to win 5 games to get the auto bid. That is a huge difference!

The regular season is awarded disproportionately in the MAC.

I would say they finally reward the regular season appropriately. It should be huge to be one of the top two. You should be penalized for having a lousy season and not just get to wipe the slate clean.

I agree with NIU...yeah, a bottom seed has to win more games, but its a very doable feat. When you get hot in a tournament, it can carry you a long way.

Having the knowledge that all teams can have a shot at the autobid, you can actually use that to your advantage. While some team works hard trying to win as many games as possible during the regular season, getting fatigued by the end and possibly sustaining injury, a "bottom" team could play just well enough to keep their legs and bodies good for the tournament and try to "turn it on" for the tournament.

Also, that top team has the pressure of being "rusty"...the same arguement is made about NBA teams that go the distance vice the team that wraps up fast and has to wait for their oppponent. No way to truly know which is better, but I'd rather play without a long layoff...

So being the top team may not really be rewarding...playing fewer games could possibly be detrimental; you could be knocked off in your first game!...the middle seeds actually are better off for our tournament...not too few and not too many...

And at the end of the day, championship caliber teams will prevail regardless of the circumstances. If the top seeds are really that much better than the lower seeded teams, these trivial issues won't matter, which leads me back to my original statement. If we're going to pick and choose who gets into the tourney, because we're afraid that the top seed won't win, then why don't we just get rid of the tournament? While there should be some reward given to the regular season champ (and they do get an NIT bid and the byes) if you think that they should be handed the auto-bid, then why even have a tournament?

I would agree that we don't need a tournament, but that ship has long since sailed, and for a number of reasons, the concept of the conference tourney for the NCAA bid is here to stay. That being the case, giving some protection to your top teams makes sense to me. The others still have a shot, but based on their performance that shot can be pretty long or doable. Last year OU was not the best team in the conference and was at a disadvantage compared to the top two seeds, but they were able to overcome the one extra game to take the title down. Nobody is handing the regular season top teams a title, They still have to win it on the floor. But teams who were not good don't get to be on more or less even terms with those who outplayed them.

(02-07-2013 06:43 PM)axeme Wrote: [ -> ]I would agree that we don't need a tournament, but that ship has long since sailed, and for a number of reasons, the concept of the conference tourney for the NCAA bid is here to stay. That being the case, giving some protection to your top teams makes sense to me. The others still have a shot, but based on their performance that shot can be pretty long or doable. Last year OU was not the best team in the conference and was at a disadvantage compared to the top two seeds, but they were able to overcome the one extra game to take the title down. Nobody is handing the regular season top teams a title, They still have to win it on the floor. But teams who were not good don't get to be on more or less even terms with those who outplayed them.

And there are times when a team may lose a key player in the middle of the season, and suffer in conference play but get him back at the end of the year. Or vice versa, the team that wins the conference loses it's best player with two games to go, and is no longer the "best" team.

You can argue all you want that OU wasn't the best team in the league last year, but quite frankly I don't think any other team in the MAC would have done as well in the tourney as they did. Was it just because they got hot at the right time vs. being supremely talented? Who cares, I'd rather have the team that's playing the best basketball representing the MAC in the NCAA tournament.

The MAC did a good job with the new conference tournament set up. A conference should reward their best programs.

Perhaps it would be different if we weren't a one-bid conference for the past 10 years. Until that changes, it's best to reward your most consistent teams.

Whining about the seeding seems silly to me. If a team can't prove it's ability during the regular season, why should they get a free pass in the postseason? Run the gauntlet and prove that you're better than your record.

It's not really an opinion that OU wasn't the best team in the MAC last year. The standings say they weren't. And isn't the team that wins the tourney the team that's playing the best basketball, whether they are the 1 seed or the 5 seed or whatever? I'm not sure what you are trying to say. I am not arguing that there shouldn't be the tourney; like I said, that is a done deal. I do like to keep a lot of meaning in the regular season or we give our fans nothing to root for and our teams little to play for. Then it's just exhibition games until March if we run a more or less straight bracket with one round of byes.

(02-07-2013 07:46 PM)axeme Wrote: [ -> ]It's not really an opinion that OU wasn't the best team in the MAC last year. The standings say they weren't. And isn't the team that wins the tourney the team that's playing the best basketball, whether they are the 1 seed or the 5 seed or whatever? I'm not sure what you are trying to say. I am not arguing that there shouldn't be the tourney; like I said, that is a done deal. I do like to keep a lot of meaning in the regular season or we give our fans nothing to root for and our teams little to play for. Then it's just exhibition games until March if we run a more or less straight bracket with one round of byes.

I was just pointing out that I'd rather have the conference tournament setup than the Ivy League format. It still rewards the regular season, but it doesn't make it the end all be all.

I agree that this is a good format. as long as we are a 1 bid league, we need to help get our best team in the tournament so we can win more ncaa tourney games. yes i know ohio was an exception to that. but too many years our 1 seed is not in the ncaa tourney. once, if ever, we are a multibid league then move it back