(12-20-2016 05:18 PM)kreed5120 Wrote:  I still believe OU and Akron are the leading contenders for the MAC regular season title. Other teams like CMU are good enough that they can spring an upset and potentially win the Tourney, but in CMU case I don't feel they have the size and depth to go 14-4 or whatever it takes to win the regular season title.

CMU may not have the frontcourt talent to carry them to a MACC, but depth is not a concern. They're deep, and the Rayson/Keane combo gives them a lot of combos to keep at least one of them on the floor. They're a legit 9-10 deep.

(12-20-2016 07:23 PM)eich41 Wrote:  

(12-20-2016 05:18 PM)kreed5120 Wrote:  I still believe OU and Akron are the leading contenders for the MAC regular season title. Other teams like CMU are good enough that they can spring an upset and potentially win the Tourney, but in CMU case I don't feel they have the size and depth to go 14-4 or whatever it takes to win the regular season title.

CMU may not have the frontcourt talent to carry them to a MACC, but depth is not a concern. They're deep, and the Rayson/Keane combo gives them a lot of combos to keep at least one of them on the floor. They're a legit 9-10 deep.

I was more so hinting at the fact Rayson and Keene are consistently playing 36-40 minutes per game and combined they account for over 50% of the points and over 60% of the assists. Clearly the coach isn't high on his bench if he's asking these 2 to play pretty much every minute of every game.

my rankings through 12/20, big win for Toledo tonight against a very good Rambler team



1) CMU .742
2) EMU .699
3) Kent .696
4) UB .645
5) Ohio .644
6) Toledo .632
7) Akron .619
8) BGSU .593
9) BSU .560
10) WMU .555
11) NIU .545
12) Miami .455

(12-21-2016 01:00 AM)MaddDawgz02 Wrote:  my rankings through 12/20, big win for Toledo tonight against a very good Rambler team



1) CMU .742
2) EMU .699
3) Kent .696
4) UB .645
5) Ohio .644
6) Toledo .632
7) Akron .619
8) BGSU .593
9) BSU .560
10) WMU .555
11) NIU .545
12) Miami .455

Very nice win for Toledo. I said the other day wasn't sure how to gauge Toledo. But I now think they deservedly belong in the contender group, and I can make an argument they could vault to No. 1 in my "Just looking at who they've played and what they've done" poll.

The Rockets now have the league's two highest KenPom wins, don't have any horrible losses and have played three close games against solid competition (St. Joseph's and MTSU X2).

In fact, think Toledo deserves top billing for now, with the caveat the two best wins were against Nos. 116 and 120 in the KenPom. So, still nothing that make you make tournament plans. But the overall body, despite SIX losses, is probably better than anybody else in the league.

Let's not forget to mention NIU beating South Florida on the road. True, South Florida is a sub 200 ranked team and I saw South Florida's best player (Jamal McMurray) up and quit just prior to the game. He had just got back from a suspension and scored 25 against No. 16 South Carolina on Saturday. But as MAC fans, we're in no position to turn down wins, especially against an AAC school. Plus, some payback for the Huskies for the football beatdown the Bulls gave them.

And there is always WMU later on tonight against UCLA to further right the league's ship. ... Well, speaking of football, too bad this one will be on the hardwood.

(12-21-2016 01:43 AM)Wadszip Wrote:  

(12-21-2016 01:00 AM)MaddDawgz02 Wrote:  my rankings through 12/20, big win for Toledo tonight against a very good Rambler team



1) CMU .742
2) EMU .699
3) Kent .696
4) UB .645
5) Ohio .644
6) Toledo .632
7) Akron .619
8) BGSU .593
9) BSU .560
10) WMU .555
11) NIU .545
12) Miami .455

Very nice win for Toledo. I said the other day wasn't sure how to gauge Toledo. But I now think they deservedly belong in the contender group, and I can make an argument they could vault to No. 1 in my "Just looking at who they've played and what they've done" poll.

The Rockets now have the league's two highest KenPom wins, don't have any horrible losses and have played three close games against solid competition (St. Joseph's and MTSU X2).

In fact, think Toledo deserves top billing for now, with the caveat the two best wins were against Nos. 116 and 120 in the KenPom. So, still nothing that make you make tournament plans. But the overall body, despite SIX losses, is probably better than anybody else in the league.

Let's not forget to mention NIU beating South Florida on the road. True, South Florida is a sub 200 ranked team and I saw South Florida's best player (Jamal McMurray) up and quit just prior to the game. He had just got back from a suspension and scored 25 against No. 16 South Carolina on Saturday. But as MAC fans, we're in no position to turn down wins, especially against an AAC school. Plus, some payback for the Huskies for the football beatdown the Bulls gave them.

And there is always WMU later on tonight against UCLA to further right the league's ship. ... Well, speaking of football, too bad this one will be on the hardwood.

I would call tomorrow "Separation Wednesday". We will learn a few things about a few teams tomorrow. Pretty amazing how busy the MAC slate is tomorrow, and every team is on the road.

(12-18-2016 04:36 PM)Wadszip Wrote:  Ranking the teams this year is next to impossible because you have to grasp at straws to find anything that is worth touting for anybody, but I'll give it a shot.

The contenders:

Akron: Has the most top 200 Kenpom wins with four and has two non-embarrassing losses on the road to top 25 ranked teams. But the Zips also have a horrible loss at Youngstown State (276). It just shows how weak all the resumes are that you have to tout top 200 wins. Last year at this time, Akron had 3 top 100ish wins (@Arkansas, Iona, UC-Santa Barbara) and another top 120ish (@Marshall). This year, the best win is No. 141 Marshall at home (which sadly is the No. 3 ranked win for the league).

Ohio: The Bobcats' 67-65 OT win against No. 118 Georgia Tech is the second highest for the league. But the Bobcats have just one other top 200 win (No. 172 Sam Houston State). Ohio doesn't have a unthinkable loss like Akron, but the two losses were against teams ranked 100 or below (No. 100 Iona and No. 141 Marshall).

Buffalo: With five games against top 75 ranked teams, the Bulls have played, pretty easily, the strongest schedule. No shame in those losses, and three were close games. But the Canisius loss (No. 183) was bad. The Bulls have just three D1 wins and the best was No. 176 Weber State. After that, it's 269 Niagara and 346 Coppin State.

Central Michigan: The second most top 200 wins with three (143 William & Mary and No. 157 Green Bay (twice)). No horrible losses. Maybe resume wise, you could make a case they should be No. 1, slightly, but again I'm comparing the best of the mediocre. I'm mainly keeping CMU here because I thought Akron/Buffalo/Ohio were the top three teams coming in and nobody has done anything to definitely say they still shouldn't be the top three.

Eastern Michigan: Only three D1 wins with the best, and only in the top 200, being No. 156 Omaha. The OT loss to No. 58 Pittsburgh is the best thing on the resume so far. Loss to No. 155 IUPUI isn't horrible. Too hard to judge them.

The middle:

Toledo: The Rockets are also hard to gauge and maybe could be in the above group. They have the highest ranked win against No. 116 Evansville in OT. Speaking of OT, have played four OT games already and a one-point game against St. Joseph's. Outside of the Evansville win, no others in the top 200. But they don't have any bad losses, No. 157 Green Bay being the worst. They've played No. 59 Middle Tennessee twice in the state of Tennessee. Both games were close (one in OT).

Ball State: Best win is No. 196 Eastern Kentucky in OT. No horrible losses (No. 163 Indiana State the worst). This is about as meh as it gets as, though, because outside No. 75 Valpo or No. 79 Alabama, haven't played anybody.

Kent State: Has beaten (or played) absolutely nobody. Best win is No. 208 NJIT. They also have a horrible loss to No. 205 South Dakota and bad loss to No. 171 Northeastern. I guess that's how you out "meh" Ball State.

The bad:

Bowling Green: Two sub 200 losses (South Dakota and UMKC). The other losses aren't horrible, though. BG's best win is against No. 159 Murray State.

Northern Illinois: Two sub 200 losses (Northridge and Cal Poly). Best win is No. 163 Indiana State in OT (which they also turned around and lost to). There is really nothing you could sort of brag about.

Western Michigan: Only two D1 wins and the best being No. 227 James Madison. On the bright side, four of the losses have been to teams 100 or better (Villanova, Wilmington, Oakland, Boise). On the downside, a 23-point loss to No. 226 Cleveland State and a 10-point loss to No. 287 UTEP look horrible.

Miami: Two sub 200 losses (Wright State, Delaware); two more bad losses (No. 193 Northern Kentucky and No. 168 Missouri). Three of the four wins are to teams ranked sub 300. On the bright side, they do have a win over No. 155 IUPUI, which actually is one of the better ones for the league.

not that it means much but to be factual, our win over Georgia Tech was 67-61 and did not to go OT.

(12-21-2016 01:43 AM)Wadszip Wrote:  

(12-21-2016 01:00 AM)MaddDawgz02 Wrote:  my rankings through 12/20, big win for Toledo tonight against a very good Rambler team



1) CMU .742
2) EMU .699
3) Kent .696
4) UB .645
5) Ohio .644
6) Toledo .632
7) Akron .619
8) BGSU .593
9) BSU .560
10) WMU .555
11) NIU .545
12) Miami .455

Very nice win for Toledo. I said the other day wasn't sure how to gauge Toledo. But I now think they deservedly belong in the contender group, and I can make an argument they could vault to No. 1 in my "Just looking at who they've played and what they've done" poll.

The Rockets now have the league's two highest KenPom wins, don't have any horrible losses and have played three close games against solid competition (St. Joseph's and MTSU X2).

In fact, think Toledo deserves top billing for now, with the caveat the two best wins were against Nos. 116 and 120 in the KenPom. So, still nothing that make you make tournament plans. But the overall body, despite SIX losses, is probably better than anybody else in the league.

Let's not forget to mention NIU beating South Florida on the road. True, South Florida is a sub 200 ranked team and I saw South Florida's best player (Jamal McMurray) up and quit just prior to the game. He had just got back from a suspension and scored 25 against No. 16 South Carolina on Saturday. But as MAC fans, we're in no position to turn down wins, especially against an AAC school. Plus, some payback for the Huskies for the football beatdown the Bulls gave them.

And there is always WMU later on tonight against UCLA to further right the league's ship. ... Well, speaking of football, too bad this one will be on the hardwood.

Clearly you haven't SEEN us play. It is frequently very ugly. On the other hand we are, for forty minutes, almost exactly as good, or bad, as nearly every team we've played. Poetic justice to be .500, I guess.

If ESPN aka The Mouse did not fleece cable operators ESPN3 would not exist and the MAC would have a limited tv package

Updated rankings after tonights games (12-21), Kent's solid 3 spot standing has shrunk significantly after a dud on the road against PAC 12 Beavers, Bulls fall, Zips on the rise. Broncos rise 1 spot despite losing on the road.

1) CMU .775
2) EMU .698
3) Kent .668
4) Ohio .641
5) Akron .639
6) Toledo .623
7) Buffalo .608
8) BGSU .587
9) WMU .559
10) Ball St .559
11) NIU .546
12) Miami .456

Akron has a chance today (and is heavily favored) to pick up its 2nd tournament trophy of the season. Has any other MAC teams won 1 this season?

(12-22-2016 09:25 AM)kreed5120 Wrote:  Akron has a chance today (and is heavily favored) to pick up its 2nd tournament trophy of the season. Has any other MAC teams won 1 this season?

And all you have to do is beat a 2-11 Maryland-Eastern Shore squad who beat a 2-8 UTEP squad to get there.

UC-Irvine was probably the Zips toughest competition for the Sun Bowl Invitational.

(12-22-2016 09:57 AM)BobcatEngineer Wrote:  

(12-22-2016 09:25 AM)kreed5120 Wrote:  Akron has a chance today (and is heavily favored) to pick up its 2nd tournament trophy of the season. Has any other MAC teams won 1 this season?

And all you have to do is beat a 2-11 Maryland-Eastern Shore squad who beat a 2-8 UTEP squad to get there.

UC-Irvine was probably the Zips toughest competition for the Sun Bowl Invitational.

I don't think any reasonable Akron fan is claiming that our two tournaments are great achievements that we can use to boast over the other teams in the MAC. However, the fact remains that winning a tournament, even a bad tournament, show that a team is winning the games that it needs to win. Other than a loss to open the season, Akron has lived up to the standards that it needs to meet. The team has shown that is is not ready to take the next step, by losing both of its games against great opponents, but it does not have the head-scratching, bad losses that almost every other team in the MAC has.


P.S. UC-Irvine was absolutely the best team that Akron could have played in the tournament. Every one knew that going in. The only reason that the two teams played first, was so UTEP, the home team, could guarantee a chance to play in the championship game. Even that failed when they lost to an abysmal UMES team.

(12-22-2016 10:23 AM)UAZippers Wrote:  

(12-22-2016 09:57 AM)BobcatEngineer Wrote:  

(12-22-2016 09:25 AM)kreed5120 Wrote:  Akron has a chance today (and is heavily favored) to pick up its 2nd tournament trophy of the season. Has any other MAC teams won 1 this season?

And all you have to do is beat a 2-11 Maryland-Eastern Shore squad who beat a 2-8 UTEP squad to get there.

UC-Irvine was probably the Zips toughest competition for the Sun Bowl Invitational.

I don't think any reasonable Akron fan is claiming that our two tournaments are great achievements that we can use to boast over the other teams in the MAC. However, the fact remains that winning a tournament, even a bad tournament, show that a team is winning the games that it needs to win. Other than a loss to open the season, Akron has lived up to the standards that it needs to meet. The team has shown that is is not ready to take the next step, by losing both of its games against great opponents, but it does not have the head-scratching, bad losses that almost every other team in the MAC has.


P.S. UC-Irvine was absolutely the best team that Akron could have played in the tournament. Every one knew that going in. The only reason that the two teams played first, was so UTEP, the home team, could guarantee a chance to play in the championship game. Even that failed when they lost to an abysmal UMES team.

Seriously? This "tournament" is little more than a couple of OOC games. Implying that it shows sort of ability to handle "tournament" pressure is laughable. Every single early season tournament is simply a slate of OOC games with a tourney format. Simply winning the "tournament" is not a big deal to these teams. Don't misconstrue that, they certainly want to win because it means they're winning several OOC games and you want to win every game on the schedule. However, the notion that there is added pressure because the "tournament" is on the line is downright laughable. When looking at resumes later in the year, have you ever heard someone say "Team XYZ won the Barbasol Invitational this year, that's a big resume booster"? They may say "Team XYZ went out to Maui at the beginning of the year and beat Duke, Uconn, and Michigan" They're simply OOC games at a neutral site. Akron didn't HAVE to win those games any more than they would have if there was no tourney format and they were just scheduled to play UC Irvine and MES.

I do agree with the second half of your post though. It's hard to get much of a read on any teams at this point. There simply are no great wins from anyone. Add in that it seems most of the schedules seem to be void of teams in the 60-125 range and the real opportunities to pick up quality wins were sparse. The best wins the MAC has are 100-200 teams. Nearly every team has a bad loss at this point, with the exceptions being CMU (UALR, St. Bon, and Illinois) and Akron has the opener, but have played well since.

(12-22-2016 09:57 AM)BobcatEngineer Wrote:  

(12-22-2016 09:25 AM)kreed5120 Wrote:  Akron has a chance today (and is heavily favored) to pick up its 2nd tournament trophy of the season. Has any other MAC teams won 1 this season?

And all you have to do is beat a 2-11 Maryland-Eastern Shore squad who beat a 2-8 UTEP squad to get there.

UC-Irvine was probably the Zips toughest competition for the Sun Bowl Invitational.

hence the heavily favored.

My post about Akron's early season tournament wasn't suppose to be taken as a serious justification for their play this year.

Assuming Akron doesn't flub up, 10-3 is exactly what I had Akron finishing OOC play before the season began. Creighton and Gonzaga I had penciled in as losses and I just figured Akron would drop a game to either Marshall, Mercer, Air Force, UCI, or UTEP (before I knew they would be this bad). YSU came as a surprise.

Akron I'm pretty sure was favored in the 11 non Creighton/Gonzaga OOC games and put up a 9-1 (predicting 10-1 after tonight) record in those games. Beating the teams you are expected to beat is easier said than done. Last night the MAC was favored in all but 1 game, yet as a conference we went 2-4 last night. CMU and Akron have done the best job of winning the games that you are suppose to win to date. That should be worth something.

(12-22-2016 11:56 AM)kreed5120 Wrote:  My post about Akron's early season tournament wasn't suppose to be taken as a serious justification for their play this year.

Assuming Akron doesn't flub up, 10-3 is exactly what I had Akron finishing OOC play before the season began. Creighton and Gonzaga I had penciled in as losses and I just figured Akron would drop a game to either Marshall, Mercer, Air Force, UCI, or UTEP (before I knew they would be this bad). YSU came as a surprise.

Akron I'm pretty sure was favored in the 11 non Creighton/Gonzaga OOC games and put up a 9-1 (predicting 10-1 after tonight) record in those games. Beating the teams you are expected to beat is easier said than done. Last night the MAC was favored in all but 1 game, yet as a conference we went 2-4 last night. CMU and Akron have done the best job of winning the games that you are suppose to win to date. That should be worth something.

I didn't think yours was serious but the one I quoted certainly was...

I agree with you on the second point, which I alluded to above. If you have a lack of quality wins, then the best way to try to separate the crowd is by the fewest/least bad losses. CMU is probably the only team without a bad loss at this point (they also played a weak schedule overall), but they've beat every team in the should win/toss up category. I am giving Akron the benefit of their only bad loss being the first game of the year and playing well since. Everyone else either has multiple bad losses and/or are dropping those games with less than a month to go to MAC play.

At this point the only certainty is that the MAC is a one bid league again this year and you better win the tourney if you want to get to the dance...

(12-22-2016 11:57 AM)eich41 Wrote:  

(12-22-2016 11:56 AM)kreed5120 Wrote:  My post about Akron's early season tournament wasn't suppose to be taken as a serious justification for their play this year.

Assuming Akron doesn't flub up, 10-3 is exactly what I had Akron finishing OOC play before the season began. Creighton and Gonzaga I had penciled in as losses and I just figured Akron would drop a game to either Marshall, Mercer, Air Force, UCI, or UTEP (before I knew they would be this bad). YSU came as a surprise.

Akron I'm pretty sure was favored in the 11 non Creighton/Gonzaga OOC games and put up a 9-1 (predicting 10-1 after tonight) record in those games. Beating the teams you are expected to beat is easier said than done. Last night the MAC was favored in all but 1 game, yet as a conference we went 2-4 last night. CMU and Akron have done the best job of winning the games that you are suppose to win to date. That should be worth something.

I didn't think yours was serious but the one I quoted certainly was...

I agree with you on the second point, which I alluded to above. If you have a lack of quality wins, then the best way to try to separate the crowd is by the fewest/least bad losses. CMU is probably the only team without a bad loss at this point (they also played a weak schedule overall), but they've beat every team in the should win/toss up category. I am giving Akron the benefit of their only bad loss being the first game of the year and playing well since. Everyone else either has multiple bad losses and/or are dropping those games with less than a month to go to MAC play.

At this point the only certainty is that the MAC is a one bid league again this year and you better win the tourney if you want to get to the dance...

Yes, the only way a MAC team gets an at-large is if Akron, CMU, or Ohio go something absurd like 16-2 in conference play and loses to some team in the Finals that did extremely well in conference play as well. I don't see any MAC team dominating MAC play like that.

I would say no MAC team is close to an at-large without wins over top 50-type teams OOC, preferably away from home. You have to show you are beating teams that definitely belong and will be in the tourney. A dominant performance in a conference where no one is beating that quality of team OOC doesn't really matter that much to the committee when they are comparing resumes to teams with worse records but wins against ranked teams. It seems the first question the committee asks is not what is your W-L record, but what is your best win and where was it?

(12-22-2016 12:54 PM)axeme Wrote:  I would say no MAC team is close to an at-large without wins over top 50-type teams OOC, preferably away from home. You have to show you are beating teams that definitely belong and will be in the tourney. A dominant performance in a conference where no one is beating that quality of team OOC doesn't really matter that much to the committee when they are comparing resumes to teams with worse records but wins against ranked teams. It seems the first question the committee asks is not what is your W-L record, but what is your best win and where was it?

Agreed. If you're going to have a weak schedule and not have any top 50 wins (in the entire conference) then you would have to have a very gaudy record to even have a shot. For example the 31-2 Murray State team from a few years back, and even they would have been a bubble team had they not gotten the AQ.

I agree with what you are saying, but a 29-5 team would be extremely challenging to ignore. That kind of volume win total in a conference like the MAC, which is semi respectable, would make any MAC team perform well in Ken Pom, RPI, or whatever metric these guys use these days. At the absolute worst said MAC team would be a very controversial snub and lock for 1st 4 out.

It won't happen of course so no point in dwelling on it.