I think there are some good points in these ideas...but ulitmately in the MAC, you should schedule with the intention of getting an at-large bid...in my opinion.

Perfect example. Akron is 22-4 and realistically has ZERO chance at an at-large bid.

Even if they run the table to the MAC title game and lose..they would be 29-5...and I'm fairly certain they would not get in.

They played a couple games to boost their RPI (at Gonzaga, at Creighton)...but after that their schedule was pretty garbage.....and it's costing them.

YSU, American, Radford, Ga Southern, Air Force, Mercer, Coppin St, Marshall, UC Irvine & MD Eastern Shore.

ewwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww

ZERO TOP 100 WINS
ZERO GAMES VS. TOP 100 (outside of Gonzaga, Creighton)
BEST WIN: OHIO (rpi 108)

That is a pitiful resume.

Now...

Had Ohio added games at Creighton and at Gonzaga....to at GT, at WKU and at Iona....now you got something.

I think at GT is a great game....especially now that they're getting better.

At WKU and at Iona are solid mid-major home-and-homes...ZERO wrong with that.

I'd love us to get the same setup with some others like MTSU, Valpo, Belmont or ETSU....or start looking back to the A-10....GW, Mason, URI, St Bonnie, UMass, Richmond, VCU would all be good home-and-home options.

We just have to get away from playing bottom dwellers from bottom dwelling leagues (Milwaukee, Southern, Tenn Tech, Bryant)

I get that Cleveland St and Marshall are regional "rivalries"...so those should be your worst games.

I still go back to Jim Christian's first year....and I know we were loaded coming off Sweet 16...but at Oklahoma, at Memphis, at Robert Morris, at Belmont, at UMass, vs Richmond, vs St. Bonnie...that year he had 5 Top 100 games and three others Top 152 and below. That's a good schedule and one (had we taken care of business) would've got Ohio at-large considerations.

Just imagine...had AC stayed healthy and Ohio wouldn't have gagged all three of Marshall, WKU and Iona....Cats could easily be sitting at 20-3 (11-2) and would have ZERO shot at an at-large.

You gotta give yourself a chance. The NCAA is not being secretive about their process....

Ask...

Murray State in 2014...25-5 (best OOC win 20-12 Illinois St team).... no bid
St. Mary's last year...26-5 (best OOC win vs. 14-15 Stanford team)....no bid

You gotta play people. And I know scheduling is a bitch for mid-majors...but find a way to give yourself a chance

Is Clemson the only team from South Carolina in the Charleston thing?? Clemson is closer to Georgia and North Carolina than Charleston. Why is College of Charleston not in it? Or USC-east?

I still contend that home and home(s) vs Rice/Tulane/Memphis/DePaul in those hotbeds of athletes would be scheduling genius. Wouldn't the O-zone get more fired up for a visit from a major conference school than a visit from NorthEast Scrub-League State?

Respectfully disagree with a the "we're in the MAC, ain't gonna happen"

The MAC has a history...has notoriety in basketball...and if a team runs thru the league at 16-3 or 17-2 and has a quality out-of-conference schedule WITH WINS...they'll get consideration.

It's never happened...so I guess we don't know. But to give up trying is just foolish. If that's the case, just schedule Urbana 22 times and wait until March in Cleveland.

The MAC is not the OVC or the MAAC...

St. Mary's got boned cause their schedule was awful.

Monmouth got boned because they play in really, really weak league....and lost at Army and Canisius in non-conf. They beat Georgetown, USC, UCLA and Notre Dame out of conference. Only two of those teams even made the NCAA tourney. So I wasn't stunned they were shunned. G'twn and UCLA were bad last year...each had losing record.

St. Mary's was bigger crime. 6-1 vs. Top 100...much tougher league. But they were missing a good OOC win (14-15 Stanford doesn't cut it....and they lost at Cal, their only other legit OOC game)

I'm not in the category of giving up on trying for an at-large. Name me one MAC team since 1999 that was left off the bubble? The MAC doesn't get at-large teams because they haven't had one worthy of an at-large bid in 16 years.

No reason Ohio should quit trying to break that ceiling.

(And there's nothing wrong with 1-for-1 games...wasn't sure what you were implying with those. I'm all for a 1-for-1 with Valpo or MTSU)

Doubt Monroe would do anything to possibly blow a big post count lead......

I think that's the biggest part of the MAC scheduling that I have a problem with. If we play the big boys on their terms we lose. As everybody here knows I am not a proponent of feeding the big boys on their terms. But because of that we can't afford to schedule a bunch of cream puffs. Get the very best teams you can find that will give you home-and-homes and fill your schedule with them. Schedule as many MVC teams as you can find. Ditto with the Horizon. Even though they are a little down right now they are our peers. No more SWAC or MEAC teams. Find a way to get into good holiday tournaments.

If Akron had replaced four of those teams with four more road game RPI boosters the problem wouldn't be their OOC SOS. It would be their record. Instead of 22-4 they would be 18-8. Now if they had managed to get two home games against, say Illinois State and Oakland, plus two road games against similar teams we are talking about an improved RPI (or KenPom or Sagarin) and a 20-6 record with a couple of good looking wins and the potential for a 27-7 record on Selection Sunday (assuming they lose the MAC Championship game).

In regards to Monmouth, the Dance Card formula guys try to project the field each year according to how the committee has put together fields in the past. Last year, Monmouth was at #52 according to their formula: http://www.unf.edu/~jcoleman/dance2016.htm. Well off the bubble. They had just one Top 50 win in the regular season (Notre Dame). They beat some big name teams bu most of the big names weren't very good last year (UCLA - 110, USC - 61, Georgetown - 103, Rutgers - 293, Notre Dame - 24). After November 29th, they played just one Top 100 team. 

Part of that financial commitment, if they're serious, is to bump up the home games, or travel to wherever it takes to get winnable high major road games. I.e., not KU, or UK, etc. I'm not sayign they should burn that money, but if the goal is being At-large worthy, it seems to me that's part of the process. Maybe there's something I'm missing though.

And we've played some of those teams in the past, so it's not out of the realm of possibility.

That's a great list. A TON of teams to choose from. I wouldn't mind starting at the top and just start calling. Get the Southern, Milwaukee, Bryant and other trash off the schedule.

Add another high-major road game like GT (need more than one)

And can we just clear this up about Monmouth. They DID do what the NCAA asked them to do. And their schedule set them up for an at-large. BUT YOU CANNOT LOSE AT ARMY AND AT CANISIUS.

That's what killed them. Those two losses totally screwed them. Reverse those and they are in. No question.

Cannot afford bad losses as a low-major (or a mid-major) if you want to sniff at-large chance.

I don't think it's as much as a pipe dream as some think to get an at-large out of the MAC...but you have to schedule for it. Can't after the fact of going 29-5 and complain when you've played nothing but trash and lost your only good games (i.e. Akron)

From quality of non-con scheduling to quantity: can someone explain why Ohio has two fewer overall games played than every team in the MAC with the exception of WMU?