menu
Logo
person
Bobcat Attack Menu
Logo
person
Ohio Basketball Topic
Topic: Is This Enough, or Still Too Soft?
Page: 2 of 2
Turney13
General User
T13
Member Since: 7/28/2010
Post Count: 364
person
mail
Turney13
mail
Posted: 6/15/2012 10:25 AM
settings_applications edit_note
Ohio69 wrote:expand_more
Our schedule really doesn't matter.

The MAC doesn't get at large bids.

All that matters is what happens in Cleveland in March, as we Ohio fans know well after 2005, 2010, and 2012.

That said, I think it would be more fun to have at least 3 Memphis type (top 25- top 40 opponent) games every year.


I'd argue with our performance last year, returning the same team - we will get more of a benefit of the doubt then the typical 23 win MAC team. 
bigtillyoopsupsideurhead
General User
Member Since: 12/1/2006
Location: Cincinnati
Post Count: 1,926
mail
bigtillyoopsupsideurhead
mail
Posted: 6/15/2012 11:10 AM
settings_applications edit_note
Ohio69 wrote:expand_more
Our schedule really doesn't matter.

The MAC doesn't get at large bids.

All that matters is what happens in Cleveland in March, as we Ohio fans know well after 2005, 2010, and 2012.

That said, I think it would be more fun to have at least 3 Memphis type (top 25- top 40 opponent) games every year.


This is such a ridiculous assertion. Conferences don't get at-large bids, teams do. If we would have won another game or two last year we would have been squarely on the bubble had we not won in Cleveland. 

Kent State in 2008 was a lock to make the NCAA tournament, but they got the at-large so it didn't matter. 


Ohio69
General User
O69
Member Since: 12/20/2004
Post Count: 3,124
person
mail
Ohio69
mail
Posted: 6/15/2012 11:20 AM
settings_applications edit_note
bigtillyoopsupsideurhead wrote:expand_more
Kent State in 2008 was a lock to make the NCAA tournament, but they got the at-large so it didn't matter.


You meant they won the tourney not got the at-large.

Anyway, I have zero faith that Kent State would've gotten an at large in 2008.

The MAC is not respected by selection committees.
Last Edited: 6/15/2012 11:20:52 AM by Ohio69
UpSan Bobcat
General User
Member Since: 8/30/2005
Location: Upper Sandusky, OH
Post Count: 3,817
mail
UpSan Bobcat
mail
Posted: 6/15/2012 12:36 PM
settings_applications edit_note
Ohio69 wrote:expand_more
Kent State in 2008 was a lock to make the NCAA tournament, but they got the at-large so it didn't matter.


You meant they won the tourney not got the at-large.

Anyway, I have zero faith that Kent State would've gotten an at large in 2008.

The MAC is not respected by selection committees.


I don't really think there's any way to know how much the NCAA tournament committee respects the MAC. The MAC hasn't had a viable at-large candidate in years.
The Optimist
General User
Member Since: 3/16/2007
Location: CLE
Post Count: 5,611
mail
The Optimist
mail
Posted: 6/15/2012 1:22 PM
settings_applications edit_note
Solid start, but I'll be disappointed if we don't see some more big schools when it is all said and done.  I'd rather play too many good teams and lose than win against lesser competition, miss the at-large, and wonder what could've been.

Just to reassure, Akron is the team that needs to worry about an at-large.  
Chicken George
General User
CG
Member Since: 1/3/2005
Post Count: 766
person
mail
Chicken George
mail
Posted: 6/15/2012 2:28 PM
settings_applications edit_note
I don't know how the committee respects the MAC either, I just know that a great MAC regular season is the last criteria I'd want them using if we're on the bubble at any time.  Assuming we didn't win the tournament of these two scenario's:

a.  Good MAC record, but a substantial number of good OOC games & wins
b.  Great MAC record, great overall record, but very few quality OOC games and wins

I think while both would be long shots, I'd rather take my chances with scenario #1.   Otherwise you're going to get the thrill of being placed on the Bubble Watch and the disappointment of watching the Selection Show and not getting in.

My guess is that last year had we not won the tournament, yet have avoided some of those bad MAC loses, we still would've been a Bubble Team that ultimately didn't get into the Big Dance.  Just my hunch.
Monroe Slavin
General User
MS
Member Since: 12/21/2004
Location: Oxnard, CA
Post Count: 9,121
person
mail
Monroe Slavin
mail
Posted: 6/15/2012 5:07 PM
settings_applications edit_note
OUVan wrote:expand_more
I think wins over those schools will produce a good RPI but it won't be enough for an at large bid IMO.


That all depends on our record OOC.  If we only lose one game again then it is easily an at large worthy schedule.  That all depends on how we do in conference as well.  If we don't lose to Toledo and EMU we were at at-large worthy team last year.


Weren't Toledo and EMU the consecutive road losses late in the regular season last year?  Whatever schools they were against, those two were horrible losses.  Almost comical how much of a low point that was vs. how the season went from there on.

How could we have lost those games?!
mf279801
General User
M279801
Member Since: 8/6/2010
Location: Newark, DE
Post Count: 2,486
person
mail
mf279801
mail
Posted: 6/15/2012 7:55 PM
settings_applications edit_note
It doesn't matter what the OCC is, unless you go undefeated against a complete slate of "who's who" power conference teams in the OCC, no team with 5 MAC losses (6 counting a tournament loss) is getting an at large bid
Showing Messages: 26 - 33 of 33
reply
vertical_align_top
vertical_align_center
vertical_align_bottom
add_comment
chevron_backward
MAC News Links



extra small (< 576px)
small (>= 576px)
medium (>= 768px)
large (>= 992px)
x-large (>= 1200px)
xx-large (>= 1400px)