Kent State Golden Flashes

Hello There, Guest! (LoginRegister)

Post Reply 
No postseason for the Men
Author Message
Older and Older Offline
2nd String
*

Posts: 372
Joined: Nov 2017
Reputation: 5
I Root For: Kent State
Location:
Post: #41
RE: No postseason for the Men
(03-14-2022 06:07 PM)ksur1 Wrote:  
(03-14-2022 05:53 PM)burden Wrote:  
(03-14-2022 05:19 PM)ksur1 Wrote:  Doesn’t the same apply to Southern Utah. You’re reinforcing my comment.

These tournaments go where the crowd will be the largest. That’s how they get paid. Kent has never drawn a crowd for tournament games. Only the best of fans know the game is going to happen. This year has even been worse for attendance.

The bracket buster folks loved our attendance and crowd participation.

Bracket Buster was great . But…. Heavily publicized weeks in advance by ESPN. It was also an in-season event. Much has changed. KSU no longer promotes Basketball program. Season ticket holders and supporters way down. Little to no effort made to find new season ticket holders.
Great opportunities we have had to elevate the program after each NCAA appearance have been ignored or failed. Chances to become a Butler, Loyola Chicago , or St Marys squandered
03-16-2022 09:09 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
axeme Offline
Sage
*

Posts: 19,696
Joined: May 2002
Reputation: 120
I Root For: hoops
Location: Location: Location:

Folding@NCAAbbsDonatorsCrappiesCrappiesCrappiesCrappiesCrappies
Post: #42
RE: No postseason for the Men
Butler, LUC, and St. Mary’s are all smaller private universities without FBS football. KSU or any MAC school could never emulate them. We should have done better, for sure, but there is an economic ceiling for schools playing FBS football. Compare us to similar size state universities.
03-16-2022 09:28 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
burden Offline
All American
*

Posts: 4,877
Joined: Nov 2005
Reputation: 13
I Root For:
Location:
Post: #43
RE: No postseason for the Men
(03-15-2022 07:58 AM)Muskrat Wrote:  
(03-15-2022 07:40 AM)burden Wrote:  
(03-15-2022 07:12 AM)Muskrat Wrote:  
(03-14-2022 08:48 PM)burden Wrote:  
(03-14-2022 07:52 PM)Muskrat Wrote:  You would think since Youngstown made it, that would be a good pairing. Or even Detroit Mercy. I know all wins aren't created equal, but Kent State has the most wins of the teams listed, and the fewest losses. Yet all the way to Utah?

I don’t know we are ranked 148 and at most 140 teams made the tournaments. I know conference champions from the weak leagues are lower than 200 in a lot of cases but I don’t Think its all that odd we are on the road. After the ncaa and nit there is not a lot of logic in pairings. Or maybe i should say there are some non basketball reasons that enter in.
I understand all that, Burden. But it seems to me that those rating systems are flawed. And I assume they consider the entire season, but many teams improve tremendously over the season. And you, or someone, noted that after Saturday's loss to Akron, Kent State was rated 5th in the MAC. They finished second in the regular season, to Toledo by only one game, and second in the tournament. They were 2-0 against Toledo, 2-1 against Akron and Ohio and 1-1 against Buffalo. That's 7-3 against the other top teams! They beat every team in the conference at least once. I submit that any rating system that would have Kent State 5th is deeply flawed. I know lots of Akron people and they are all crowing that Akron proved they are far and away the best team in the MAC. That's nonsense. All they proved was that on that one night they excelled and Kent State played poorly. They deserve congratulations and the NCAA bid, but I maintain that, day in and day out, both Kent State and Toledo are better than Akron, if only slightly so.

Still ranked 148 in a rating system that is well respected. I understand they finished the season very strong and we’re higher than that over the last 15-20 games but this tournament is scrambling to get enough teams and isn’t going to go into depth seeding teams. For all we know Southern Utah guaranteed a certain gate sale to land the home game. You know we would be lucky to draw much over 1000.

I agree that tournaments such as this one don't "seed" and that, yes, unfortunately the draw at the MACC would be embarrassingly low. So, I understand why the game is played at Utah. But I think playing Youngstown State at their place would draw well. Maybe I'm mistaken about that. I suppose the bottom line is just that I don't feel like this Kent State team is getting the respect they deserve. Obviously they don't deserve an NCAA or NIT bid, but the "vibe" I'm getting reading news articles and talking with people is that the Snapchat incident and the 20 point loss to Akron completely voided the prior two months. I reckon that is just the way it is in a conference in which most people seem to believe that nothing matters other than (a) qualifying for the conference tournament and (b) then winning that tournament.

The Youngstown st. idea would be a good one especially with the women playing there to.
03-16-2022 10:23 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Older and Older Offline
2nd String
*

Posts: 372
Joined: Nov 2017
Reputation: 5
I Root For: Kent State
Location:
Post: #44
RE: No postseason for the Men
(03-16-2022 09:28 AM)axeme Wrote:  Butler, LUC, and St. Mary’s are all smaller private universities without FBS football. KSU or any MAC school could never emulate them. We should have done better, for sure, but there is an economic ceiling for schools playing FBS football. Compare us to similar size state universities.

There are many. Perennial NCAA teams
Murray St, Morehead St, W. Kentucky, New Mexico St. WAC teams . KSU missed opportunities
03-16-2022 10:29 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
burden Offline
All American
*

Posts: 4,877
Joined: Nov 2005
Reputation: 13
I Root For:
Location:
Post: #45
RE: No postseason for the Men
(03-15-2022 07:58 AM)Muskrat Wrote:  
(03-15-2022 07:40 AM)burden Wrote:  
(03-15-2022 07:12 AM)Muskrat Wrote:  
(03-14-2022 08:48 PM)burden Wrote:  
(03-14-2022 07:52 PM)Muskrat Wrote:  You would think since Youngstown made it, that would be a good pairing. Or even Detroit Mercy. I know all wins aren't created equal, but Kent State has the most wins of the teams listed, and the fewest losses. Yet all the way to Utah?

I don’t know we are ranked 148 and at most 140 teams made the tournaments. I know conference champions from the weak leagues are lower than 200 in a lot of cases but I don’t Think its all that odd we are on the road. After the ncaa and nit there is not a lot of logic in pairings. Or maybe i should say there are some non basketball reasons that enter in.
I understand all that, Burden. But it seems to me that those rating systems are flawed. And I assume they consider the entire season, but many teams improve tremendously over the season. And you, or someone, noted that after Saturday's loss to Akron, Kent State was rated 5th in the MAC. They finished second in the regular season, to Toledo by only one game, and second in the tournament. They were 2-0 against Toledo, 2-1 against Akron and Ohio and 1-1 against Buffalo. That's 7-3 against the other top teams! They beat every team in the conference at least once. I submit that any rating system that would have Kent State 5th is deeply flawed. I know lots of Akron people and they are all crowing that Akron proved they are far and away the best team in the MAC. That's nonsense. All they proved was that on that one night they excelled and Kent State played poorly. They deserve congratulations and the NCAA bid, but I maintain that, day in and day out, both Kent State and Toledo are better than Akron, if only slightly so.

Still ranked 148 in a rating system that is well respected. I understand they finished the season very strong and we’re higher than that over the last 15-20 games but this tournament is scrambling to get enough teams and isn’t going to go into depth seeding teams. For all we know Southern Utah guaranteed a certain gate sale to land the home game. You know we would be lucky to draw much over 1000.

I agree that tournaments such as this one don't "seed" and that, yes, unfortunately the draw at the MACC would be embarrassingly low. So, I understand why the game is played at Utah. But I think playing Youngstown State at their place would draw well. Maybe I'm mistaken about that. I suppose the bottom line is just that I don't feel like this Kent State team is getting the respect they deserve. Obviously they don't deserve an NCAA or NIT bid, but the "vibe" I'm getting reading news articles and talking with people is that the Snapchat incident and the 20 point loss to Akron completely voided the prior two months. I reckon that is just the way it is in a conference in which most people seem to believe that nothing matters other than (a) qualifying for the conference tournament and (b) then winning that tournament.

Hey we got the obligatory Terry Pluto fluff piece. Yo can’t ask for anything else.
03-16-2022 11:01 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Muskrat Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 1,446
Joined: Oct 2008
Reputation: 6
I Root For: Kent State
Location:
Post: #46
RE: No postseason for the Men
(03-16-2022 09:09 AM)Older and Older Wrote:  
(03-14-2022 06:07 PM)ksur1 Wrote:  
(03-14-2022 05:53 PM)burden Wrote:  
(03-14-2022 05:19 PM)ksur1 Wrote:  Doesn’t the same apply to Southern Utah. You’re reinforcing my comment.

These tournaments go where the crowd will be the largest. That’s how they get paid. Kent has never drawn a crowd for tournament games. Only the best of fans know the game is going to happen. This year has even been worse for attendance.

The bracket buster folks loved our attendance and crowd participation.

Bracket Buster was great . But…. Heavily publicized weeks in advance by ESPN. It was also an in-season event. Much has changed. KSU no longer promotes Basketball program. Season ticket holders and supporters way down. Little to no effort made to find new season ticket holders.
Great opportunities we have had to elevate the program after each NCAA appearance have been ignored or failed. Chances to become a Butler, Loyola Chicago , or St Marys squandered

(03-16-2022 09:28 AM)axeme Wrote:  Butler, LUC, and St. Mary’s are all smaller private universities without FBS football. KSU or any MAC school could never emulate them. We should have done better, for sure, but there is an economic ceiling for schools playing FBS football. Compare us to similar size state universities.

(03-16-2022 10:29 AM)Older and Older Wrote:  
(03-16-2022 09:28 AM)axeme Wrote:  Butler, LUC, and St. Mary’s are all smaller private universities without FBS football. KSU or any MAC school could never emulate them. We should have done better, for sure, but there is an economic ceiling for schools playing FBS football. Compare us to similar size state universities.

There are many. Perennial NCAA teams
Murray St, Morehead St, W. Kentucky, New Mexico St. WAC teams . KSU missed opportunities

(03-16-2022 11:01 AM)burden Wrote:  
(03-15-2022 07:58 AM)Muskrat Wrote:  
(03-15-2022 07:40 AM)burden Wrote:  
(03-15-2022 07:12 AM)Muskrat Wrote:  
(03-14-2022 08:48 PM)burden Wrote:  I don’t know we are ranked 148 and at most 140 teams made the tournaments. I know conference champions from the weak leagues are lower than 200 in a lot of cases but I don’t Think its all that odd we are on the road. After the ncaa and nit there is not a lot of logic in pairings. Or maybe i should say there are some non basketball reasons that enter in.
I understand all that, Burden. But it seems to me that those rating systems are flawed. And I assume they consider the entire season, but many teams improve tremendously over the season. And you, or someone, noted that after Saturday's loss to Akron, Kent State was rated 5th in the MAC. They finished second in the regular season, to Toledo by only one game, and second in the tournament. They were 2-0 against Toledo, 2-1 against Akron and Ohio and 1-1 against Buffalo. That's 7-3 against the other top teams! They beat every team in the conference at least once. I submit that any rating system that would have Kent State 5th is deeply flawed. I know lots of Akron people and they are all crowing that Akron proved they are far and away the best team in the MAC. That's nonsense. All they proved was that on that one night they excelled and Kent State played poorly. They deserve congratulations and the NCAA bid, but I maintain that, day in and day out, both Kent State and Toledo are better than Akron, if only slightly so.

Still ranked 148 in a rating system that is well respected. I understand they finished the season very strong and we’re higher than that over the last 15-20 games but this tournament is scrambling to get enough teams and isn’t going to go into depth seeding teams. For all we know Southern Utah guaranteed a certain gate sale to land the home game. You know we would be lucky to draw much over 1000.

I agree that tournaments such as this one don't "seed" and that, yes, unfortunately the draw at the MACC would be embarrassingly low. So, I understand why the game is played at Utah. But I think playing Youngstown State at their place would draw well. Maybe I'm mistaken about that. I suppose the bottom line is just that I don't feel like this Kent State team is getting the respect they deserve. Obviously they don't deserve an NCAA or NIT bid, but the "vibe" I'm getting reading news articles and talking with people is that the Snapchat incident and the 20 point loss to Akron completely voided the prior two months. I reckon that is just the way it is in a conference in which most people seem to believe that nothing matters other than (a) qualifying for the conference tournament and (b) then winning that tournament.

Hey we got the obligatory Terry Pluto fluff piece. Yo can’t ask for anything else.

This subject has come up many times over the years. The bottom line is whether or not the will was there, the money wasn't, and isn't. You would need a new facility, the ability to keep coaches like Waters, Heath and Christian longer, a bigger recruiting budget, more money to promote the program, etc., etc. A mid-major public school
with an FBS football program is rarely going to come up with the funding to be a Gonzaga, St. Mary's, Butler, Loyola-Chicago. While there is general agreement that the 2001/02 team was the best in MAC history, there have been other times when a program was highly successful but didn't "move up". Look at the run Ball State had under Rick Majerus and Don Hunsaker. Jim Snyder had some excellent teams at Ohio, and even made the elite 8 (but had to win one fewer game than KSU in 2002).
03-16-2022 08:03 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
dannyb73 Offline
MAC CHAMPS
*

Posts: 5,845
Joined: May 2008
Reputation: 69
I Root For: Mem & Kent St
Location: Memphis
Post: #47
RE: No postseason for the Men
(03-16-2022 08:03 PM)Muskrat Wrote:  
(03-16-2022 09:09 AM)Older and Older Wrote:  
(03-14-2022 06:07 PM)ksur1 Wrote:  
(03-14-2022 05:53 PM)burden Wrote:  
(03-14-2022 05:19 PM)ksur1 Wrote:  Doesn’t the same apply to Southern Utah. You’re reinforcing my comment.

These tournaments go where the crowd will be the largest. That’s how they get paid. Kent has never drawn a crowd for tournament games. Only the best of fans know the game is going to happen. This year has even been worse for attendance.

The bracket buster folks loved our attendance and crowd participation.

Bracket Buster was great . But…. Heavily publicized weeks in advance by ESPN. It was also an in-season event. Much has changed. KSU no longer promotes Basketball program. Season ticket holders and supporters way down. Little to no effort made to find new season ticket holders.
Great opportunities we have had to elevate the program after each NCAA appearance have been ignored or failed. Chances to become a Butler, Loyola Chicago , or St Marys squandered

(03-16-2022 09:28 AM)axeme Wrote:  Butler, LUC, and St. Mary’s are all smaller private universities without FBS football. KSU or any MAC school could never emulate them. We should have done better, for sure, but there is an economic ceiling for schools playing FBS football. Compare us to similar size state universities.

(03-16-2022 10:29 AM)Older and Older Wrote:  
(03-16-2022 09:28 AM)axeme Wrote:  Butler, LUC, and St. Mary’s are all smaller private universities without FBS football. KSU or any MAC school could never emulate them. We should have done better, for sure, but there is an economic ceiling for schools playing FBS football. Compare us to similar size state universities.

There are many. Perennial NCAA teams
Murray St, Morehead St, W. Kentucky, New Mexico St. WAC teams . KSU missed opportunities

(03-16-2022 11:01 AM)burden Wrote:  
(03-15-2022 07:58 AM)Muskrat Wrote:  
(03-15-2022 07:40 AM)burden Wrote:  
(03-15-2022 07:12 AM)Muskrat Wrote:  I understand all that, Burden. But it seems to me that those rating systems are flawed. And I assume they consider the entire season, but many teams improve tremendously over the season. And you, or someone, noted that after Saturday's loss to Akron, Kent State was rated 5th in the MAC. They finished second in the regular season, to Toledo by only one game, and second in the tournament. They were 2-0 against Toledo, 2-1 against Akron and Ohio and 1-1 against Buffalo. That's 7-3 against the other top teams! They beat every team in the conference at least once. I submit that any rating system that would have Kent State 5th is deeply flawed. I know lots of Akron people and they are all crowing that Akron proved they are far and away the best team in the MAC. That's nonsense. All they proved was that on that one night they excelled and Kent State played poorly. They deserve congratulations and the NCAA bid, but I maintain that, day in and day out, both Kent State and Toledo are better than Akron, if only slightly so.

Still ranked 148 in a rating system that is well respected. I understand they finished the season very strong and we’re higher than that over the last 15-20 games but this tournament is scrambling to get enough teams and isn’t going to go into depth seeding teams. For all we know Southern Utah guaranteed a certain gate sale to land the home game. You know we would be lucky to draw much over 1000.

I agree that tournaments such as this one don't "seed" and that, yes, unfortunately the draw at the MACC would be embarrassingly low. So, I understand why the game is played at Utah. But I think playing Youngstown State at their place would draw well. Maybe I'm mistaken about that. I suppose the bottom line is just that I don't feel like this Kent State team is getting the respect they deserve. Obviously they don't deserve an NCAA or NIT bid, but the "vibe" I'm getting reading news articles and talking with people is that the Snapchat incident and the 20 point loss to Akron completely voided the prior two months. I reckon that is just the way it is in a conference in which most people seem to believe that nothing matters other than (a) qualifying for the conference tournament and (b) then winning that tournament.

Hey we got the obligatory Terry Pluto fluff piece. Yo can’t ask for anything else.

This subject has come up many times over the years. The bottom line is whether or not the will was there, the money wasn't, and isn't. You would need a new facility, the ability to keep coaches like Waters, Heath and Christian longer, a bigger recruiting budget, more money to promote the program, etc., etc. A mid-major public school
with an FBS football program is rarely going to come up with the funding to be a Gonzaga, St. Mary's, Butler, Loyola-Chicago. While there is general agreement that the 2001/02 team was the best in MAC history, there have been other times when a program was highly successful but didn't "move up". Look at the run Ball State had under Rick Majerus and Don Hunsaker. Jim Snyder had some excellent teams at Ohio, and even made the elite 8 (but had to win one fewer game than KSU in 2002).

Hope Pluto is better than this. His name was Dick Hunsacker.
03-16-2022 08:21 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
dannyb73 Offline
MAC CHAMPS
*

Posts: 5,845
Joined: May 2008
Reputation: 69
I Root For: Mem & Kent St
Location: Memphis
Post: #48
RE: No postseason for the Men
Dayton beat the piss out of Toledo.
03-16-2022 08:33 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Muskrat Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 1,446
Joined: Oct 2008
Reputation: 6
I Root For: Kent State
Location:
Post: #49
RE: No postseason for the Men
Sorry dannyb73. We can't all be perfect all the time.
03-16-2022 09:17 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
dannyb73 Offline
MAC CHAMPS
*

Posts: 5,845
Joined: May 2008
Reputation: 69
I Root For: Mem & Kent St
Location: Memphis
Post: #50
RE: No postseason for the Men
(03-16-2022 09:17 PM)Muskrat Wrote:  Sorry dannyb73. We can't all be perfect all the time.

Well I wouldn't expect a journalist to guess at someones name and then I would expect an editor to catch it. I will try not to offend you next time.
03-16-2022 09:23 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply 




User(s) browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)


Copyright © 2002-2022 Collegiate Sports Nation Bulletin Board System (CSNbbs), All Rights Reserved.
CSNbbs is an independent fan site and is in no way affiliated to the NCAA or any of the schools and conferences it represents.
This site monetizes links. FTC Disclosure.
We allow third-party companies to serve ads and/or collect certain anonymous information when you visit our web site. These companies may use non-personally identifiable information (e.g., click stream information, browser type, time and date, subject of advertisements clicked or scrolled over) during your visits to this and other Web sites in order to provide advertisements about goods and services likely to be of greater interest to you. These companies typically use a cookie or third party web beacon to collect this information. To learn more about this behavioral advertising practice or to opt-out of this type of advertising, you can visit http://www.networkadvertising.org.
Powered By MyBB, © 2002-2022 MyBB Group.