Currently watching a pretty boring game between Kent who is sitting Pippen and Buffalo who is playing 22 guys.

Thanks for knocking UB off our side!

With Covid uncertanty this next week is going to be Crazy.

Will Ohio be able to play? Will Toledo have to knock off BSU twice in a row? Can LCJ carry Akron from a couple losses in a row? Does Miami have an upset in em?

MACTION

Buffalo has played 9 guys, Kent 8. Kent also not playing Hamilton. No reason given.

My MAC finals prediction is a rematch of Buffalo vs Toledo!!!!

There are four high-level matchups in the Quarterfinals this year. When we had the first round you were always good for an upset or two, hence making a bit more of a mismatch in the Quarters, but now with it being top 8 these are some tough matchups.

Toledo/Ball St. - Two teams split the season series.. if Ball St. hits some shots they can be tough. They are finally healthy
Kent St/Ohio - Who knows on this one.. Status of Pippen? Status of Bobcats? But this is a battle i always expect to see in the Semis/Finals
UB/Miami - Bulls have played well against Miami this year, but RedHawks playing really well and Miami beat Buffalo in the 5/12 first round game last year
Akron/BG - Status of Turner is question number one....But a six-seed BG squad is pretty dangerous.. And with LCJ, Akron is never out of a game.

Your Tournament winner...as good of a guess as mine...selfishly I hope it's the Bulls!

Theres been lots of chalk in the early tourneys keeping NIT spots open for Toledo or even UB. Belmont IMO is the first lock at the moment. Drake may be if they dont get in on selection Sunday. Michigan State took down Mich to move off the bubble and keep them alive.

I think the MAC is more competitive than every league besides the A10 who started their tourney. The Horizon has had good games as well.

(03-07-2021 07:01 PM)UofToledoFans Wrote:  Theres been lots of chalk in the early tourneys keeping NIT spots open for Toledo or even UB. Belmont IMO is the first lock at the moment. Drake may be if they dont get in on selection Sunday. Michigan State took down Mich to move off the bubble and keep them alive.

I think the MAC is more competitive than every league besides the A10 who started their tourney. The Horizon has had good games as well.

There’s no NIT auto bids this year, just 16 at larges. Doesn’t bode well for most mid majors I would think.

Seems like that’s the MAC’s fate—to be “competitive” while other non-majors are sending multiple teams to the NCAA or at least have a second team on the bubble: MWC, WCC, MVC. I can’t even remember when the MAC’s second best team had a shot at the tourney. Even a year like UB had where they would have likely gotten an at-large had they needed one is a rarity.

I wish we weren’t so “competitive” and instead had really good teams at the top more than once every decade or so.

(03-07-2021 07:18 PM)Eagle66 Wrote:  

(03-07-2021 07:01 PM)UofToledoFans Wrote:  Theres been lots of chalk in the early tourneys keeping NIT spots open for Toledo or even UB. Belmont IMO is the first lock at the moment. Drake may be if they dont get in on selection Sunday. Michigan State took down Mich to move off the bubble and keep them alive.

I think the MAC is more competitive than every league besides the A10 who started their tourney. The Horizon has had good games as well.

There’s no NIT auto bids this year, just 16 at larges. Doesn’t bode well for most mid majors I would think.

Still would be about the 7th team right now left out if Toledo lost by NET. UB closer to 20th but could play themselves in with the right breaks. Especially with their national recognition as of the past few years. Im aware the Dukes and Ole Misses of the world have guaranteed spots.

(03-07-2021 09:07 PM)axeme Wrote:  Seems like that’s the MAC’s fate—to be “competitive” while other non-majors are sending multiple teams to the NCAA or at least have a second team on the bubble: MWC, WCC, MVC. I can’t even remember when the MAC’s second best team had a shot at the tourney. Even a year like UB had where they would have likely gotten an at-large had they needed one is a rarity.

I wish we weren’t so “competitive” and instead had really good teams at the top more than once every decade or so.

The MAC's ability to get in the at-large conversation is hurt by a few things. One, we field FBS football while a lot of other mid major conferences don't even sponsor FCS. Two, we suffer from mostly being a group of Rust Belt non-flagship public schools, compared to wealthy private universities or flagships of smaller states. Three (and related to two), MAC schools are so similar in terms of resources that it's very difficult for a program to keep up enough momentum to get to the at-large consideration before the coach gets poached. I don't see an easy solution other than pray that a program with good support like UB hires a Frank Solich basketball equivalent who'll spend their late career here and build an at-large contender.

It doesn't help that there are 4-5 schools that haven't really seemed all that interested in trying to contend.

(03-08-2021 04:19 PM)kreed5120 Wrote:  It doesn't help that there are 4-5 schools that haven't really seemed all that interested in trying to contend.

That goes hand in hand with those schools enfaces on football. NIU and WMU come to mind. Although NIU has great facilities for bball.

CMU has wbb so im not sure they are included... Miami needs some Millett upgrades but try. EMU has only cared about football since Creighton it seems and mbb has slipped since then? Correlation?

The rule of taking only the top 8 teams to the conference tournament this year was a terrible idea. The top 8 was pretty well decided 6 weeks ago and those bottom 4 teams had nothing to work for. They ended up with lots of cancellations and some very bad performances. I feel sorry for the coaches of those teams. Any other year the guys would have been continuing to work to get better with a tournament opportunity at the end.

(03-08-2021 04:19 PM)kreed5120 Wrote:  It doesn't help that there are 4-5 schools that haven't really seemed all that interested in trying to contend.

No it doesn't, but at a certain point it doesn't matter. The MAC's bottom and middle tier are better than conferences that get two bids relatively often, it's just that our top teams seldom have a legitimate at-large resume. If our bottom third of programs really made a push in hoops it'd help, but wouldn't earn us an at-large by itself. The MVC doesn't have Drake as a potential at-large because Illinois State and SIU were impressive.

(03-08-2021 07:10 PM)DICK Wrote:  The rule of taking only the top 8 teams to the conference tournament this year was a terrible idea. The top 8 was pretty well decided 6 weeks ago and those bottom 4 teams had nothing to work for. They ended up with lots of cancellations and some very bad performances. I feel sorry for the coaches of those teams. Any other year the guys would have been continuing to work to get better with a tournament opportunity at the end.

I agree with this. Every team being eligible for the conference tournament keeps every team engaged to the end. While understandable this season with Covid, hopefully the league returns to a full tournament next season and beyond.

I also agree, most seasons, the middle and bottom of the league stand up a lot better than the likes of C-USA, Mo-Valley, Colonial, even A-10. But those leagues are often top-heavy and get two. I think the MAC has had 2 NCAA caliber teams several times in recent years --- but just not the resumes. Hopefully that will change going forward.

(03-08-2021 10:20 PM)Love and Honor Wrote:  

(03-08-2021 04:19 PM)kreed5120 Wrote:  It doesn't help that there are 4-5 schools that haven't really seemed all that interested in trying to contend.

No it doesn't, but at a certain point it doesn't matter. The MAC's bottom and middle tier are better than conferences that get two bids relatively often, it's just that our top teams seldom have a legitimate at-large resume. If our bottom third of programs really made a push in hoops it'd help, but wouldn't earn us an at-large by itself. The MVC doesn't have Drake as a potential at-large because Illinois State and SIU were impressive.

You're right that at-large bids are given to teams, not conferences. What I was more so getting at is if all schools were as committed to trying to win the odds of a Buffalo team of a few years ago emerging would be greater as you would have 9-10 teams trying to strive for that level of success instead of 4-5.

Like it has been said in previous posts, the only way a One Bid League like the MAC gets an at large birth is for a particular team that wins the regular season but loses in the tournament has wins over “good or very good” teams from the Big 10, Big 12, ACC, SEC, PAC 12, and Big East during the regular season. And even then, it is not a given as a lot of times it comes down to how many teams in Major Conferences are on the bubble that particular year. And unfortunately, in most years, the Selection Committee goes with teams from Major Conferences vs. Mid Majors because of their “strength of schedule”. The dilemma facing Mid Majors every year is the only way a team from a Major Conference will play them is on their home court which we know is a major advantage for them i.e., no travel, crowd atmosphere, officiating. It takes a “perfect storm” like Buffalo a few years ago when they were in position to get an at large bid because of their out of conference performance against Majors.

(03-09-2021 08:47 AM)kreed5120 Wrote:  

(03-08-2021 10:20 PM)Love and Honor Wrote:  

(03-08-2021 04:19 PM)kreed5120 Wrote:  It doesn't help that there are 4-5 schools that haven't really seemed all that interested in trying to contend.

No it doesn't, but at a certain point it doesn't matter. The MAC's bottom and middle tier are better than conferences that get two bids relatively often, it's just that our top teams seldom have a legitimate at-large resume. If our bottom third of programs really made a push in hoops it'd help, but wouldn't earn us an at-large by itself. The MVC doesn't have Drake as a potential at-large because Illinois State and SIU were impressive.

You're right that at-large bids are given to teams, not conferences. What I was more so getting at is if all schools were as committed to trying to win the odds of a Buffalo team of a few years ago emerging would be greater as you would have 9-10 teams trying to strive for that level of success instead of 4-5.

Between the fourth school having their NET ranking 20 slots higher at 85, and the 9th school having their NET ranking 20 slots higher at 276, the former would do more good than the latter. 4-5 schools who are not all that serious about devoting the resources required to be regularly fighting for the conference championship is ... basically every division one conference this size.

(03-10-2021 08:10 AM)BruceMcF Wrote:  

(03-09-2021 08:47 AM)kreed5120 Wrote:  

(03-08-2021 10:20 PM)Love and Honor Wrote:  

(03-08-2021 04:19 PM)kreed5120 Wrote:  It doesn't help that there are 4-5 schools that haven't really seemed all that interested in trying to contend.

No it doesn't, but at a certain point it doesn't matter. The MAC's bottom and middle tier are better than conferences that get two bids relatively often, it's just that our top teams seldom have a legitimate at-large resume. If our bottom third of programs really made a push in hoops it'd help, but wouldn't earn us an at-large by itself. The MVC doesn't have Drake as a potential at-large because Illinois State and SIU were impressive.

You're right that at-large bids are given to teams, not conferences. What I was more so getting at is if all schools were as committed to trying to win the odds of a Buffalo team of a few years ago emerging would be greater as you would have 9-10 teams trying to strive for that level of success instead of 4-5.

Between the fourth school having their NET ranking 20 slots higher at 85, and the 9th school having their NET ranking 20 slots higher at 276, the former would do more good than the latter. 4-5 schools who are not all that serious about devoting the resources required to be regularly fighting for the conference championship is ... basically every division one conference this size.

That's a poor scenario. If the 9th-12th place team tried, they could jump way more than 20 spots.

Besides you're looking past the point I was trying to make. The more teams that try to build a team that's good enough to be at-large worthy, the greater the chance the MAC has a team that stumbles its way into actually achieving it.

WCC model is interesting comparison. gonzaga grew from strong mid major to national powerhouse. they added BYU who is a typical bubble team and have st mary's who is usually a bubble team. the rest of the league is like the middle to lower MAC. while mac won't likely ever have a gonzaga, you could make the argument that we could have 4-5 byu/st mary's type teams (i know BYU has a bigger budget, but i'm talking quality of team). toledo, ohio, buffalo, akron and kent are all just below that st mary's/byu standard and several other mac programs have the potential to be that good once every 3 or 4 years. i'd be more in the upgrade the top half of the league just a little camp.

WCC only got BYU because there was nowhere else for BYU sports to go when BYU decided it wanted to be independent for football.