Again, I have to say job well done so far, sir.
I read a lot of that thread. Some of the fans were excusing the 31 to 1 run saying that winning at Ohio was never going to happen in the first place because Ohio and Toledo were the best teams the MAC has fielded in a while. Others immediately questioned by then BSU has several losses to 200+ ranked teams. I think that the later is a much closer assessment of reality. BSU is just not all that good of a team and I am sure that their athletics administration is aware of that fact. I would go as far as saying that neither is in the same category as 2019 Buffalo and the are a whole host of recent teams that are just as good. As far as pairs go, Ohio and Akron dominated a much better version of the MAC in 2013.
What is going of with Toledo and Ohio is that there are numerous easy wins to be had when there usually is not. Unless you are a national title contender you are not going 17-3 in the versions of the MAC where nearly every team was ranked above 200. It just isn't happening if that's the case. I don't care if you are a top 20 team like 2019 Buffalo. You will still lose several games in that case. 14 seeds win about 1/6 of their games against seeds and that's on a neutral court with often 100+ ranked teams playing top 10 teams. Just think what would happen if that 50th ranked bubble team had a schedule with 20 games against decent but not good teams with half of them on the road. My math says that they would take far more losses than most people realize and it would be almost impossible to stay on the bubble playing that schedule. You would not get enough credit if you finished with a good record.
We are used to the MAC tournament champion getting a 12 or 13 seed. Ohio and Toledo are on track to do that if they win because they are dominating a down conference. If someone else represents the MAC, especially other than Buffalo, Akron, or Kent, it will be an ugly looking seed number.