Ohio 7 point favorite
Miami 17 point favorite
Toledo 10 point favorite


so if chalk holds its Miami

In the typical way we apply tiebreaker in the USA in almost all sports it really doesn't. It isn't uncommon for H2H to not apply if every team didn't play everyone else but usually if you beat everyone you advance and if you lose to everyone you are eliminated. With a tiebreaker, you kind of have to play Eenie Meenie and pick something at random that is pretty meaningless to break a tie. In the USA this meaningless thing is almost always H2H. This has some sensibility to it....maybe....but if the schedules are equal what it will almost always do is promote the team that took the worst loss. In the USA we tend to value good wins with bad losses over more excusable losses with lesser wins. We hear this from the talking heads on ESPN over the last decade always repeating the phase, "Who did you beat?" when critiquing the committee who has almost universally studied the losses as well more than the typical USA sports fan does. If you do analytics or ask oddsmakers if having quality wins with bad losses is better than decent losses with only decent wins is actually indicative of the first being a better team and succeeding more in the future the answer is basically a no. And this is much less common as the first tiebreaker around the world.

I have complained about this tiebreaker not making sense as well. H2H is a sensible first step to use for the MAC, not necessarily because it the best way to find the best team out of tied teams, but because it is just what we do here and there is certainly value in that consistency. And, I think if we are going to use H2H then let's actually use it and use it in the way that it is usually used. But you asked, "Make it make sense!" so I am going to back up and think about why it might and why the MAC might have done this.

So, if H2H isn't a particularly good method for finding who is actually the best team then what actually would be? One would be scoring margin which is fairly common to be higher on the tiebreaker list around the world than in the USA. But basketball and especially football are games that are often really decided long before the final buzzer, unlike lower scoring games like hockey and soccer, and we have a understandable culture here to not want to put wear on your 1st string to embarrass the other team. So this is rarely a high on the tiebreaker list and it has been lowered down the list in most leagues even more than it was 40 years ago. So what then else would be of actual value in finding the actual best team? Well, not all 6-2's are the same because they aren't against the same teams. The one that put up 6-2 against the toughest teams is actually likely to be the best. JMU's 9-1 is considered less impressive than ranked teams with TWO or more additional losses let alone with equal records. So if you have a situation where not everyone played everyone else involved in the tie, but one did and lost all of them, that means that the other two teams failed to better that 6-2 in spite of almost certainly playing a weaker schedule. I suppose that the MAC didn't want a tiebreaker that was almost guaranteed to eliminate the team that had played the strongest schedule among the tied teams if applied. Now given that Miami then wins the tiebreaker because they beat WMU, it means that WMU and Miami would have played all 4 of the top four finishers and Toledo and Ohio did not. So Miami's 6-2, in this sense, is better than Toledo or Ohio's 6-2. So there you go. My guess is that's the reasoning, the recognition of eliminating the team that was swept is almost certainly eliminating the team with the toughest schedule, is why the MAC doesn't do this elimination while it is common in other leagues.

Thanks Victory. As a biased Bobcat fan (is there any other kind?), I don't like it in 2025. But you helped to make it make sense.

I don't think that "logic" is the right word. Logic is "if a then b" and "if be then c" so "If a then c". It is deduction without emotion and is the most sound way of arguing. I think the right word is "sensible". That is, sensible as defined by typical American sensibilities. I think that the way we use "on the field" here is often begging the question. I think that someone that didn't share our typical sensibility would be confused that we seem to be implying that the goings on at Ball State and Bowling Green were not on the same kind of field.

To me, tiebreakers are usually trivial things and you often don't know what game will turn out to be the linchpin when the game is played. But, again, to me, the tiebreaker that coaches, players, and fans find sensible is a big part of what makes it sensible for the front office of the league. I doubt that this even feels right (and note the word "feels", this ain't logic) to a lot of Miami fans. But that has more to do with our cultural training rather than reasoned arguments for what is right or wrong. In the end, this tiebreaker was known to everyone before the season. We might not like it and can argue that next year it should be changed or whatever but in this sense I have to say that it is fair.

Down to 4 scenarios and Miami is in if they beat Ball State.

https://getsomemaction.com/news/2025/11/24/2025-mac-footb...

If Ball State beats Miami, then IF CMU WINS VS Toledo. Ohio goes to the MAC Championship game.

MAC Championship Game Scenarios
Key Outcomes Needed
For Ohio to reach the MAC Championship Game under the specified conditions, the following results must occur:

Kent State defeats Northern Illinois (NIU)
Ohio wins its game
Ball State defeats Miami (Ohio)
Central Michigan (CMU) defeats Toledo

Implications of These Outcomes

If all these results happen, Ohio will secure a spot in the MAC Championship Game. This is due to tiebreaker scenarios that favor Ohio over other teams, particularly if it finishes with a strong conference record.

Tiebreaker Considerations
Ohio's head-to-head record against Miami (Ohio) is crucial.
The performance against common opponents will also play a role in determining the final standings.
Conclusion
If these four games conclude as needed, Ohio will advance to the MAC Championship Game, showcasing the conference's competitive nature and the importance of each game in the final week.

If WVU upsets Texas Tech in Morgantown, Ohio will likely leapfrog Toledo, I am told.

I've reluctantly come to the same conclusion.

Or alternately, maybe we could shorten the regular season by one set of games and have a little play-in scenario where the top four teams play each other with the winners going to the MACC. Number 1 plays #4, and #2 plays #3. Other MAC teams would then play each other the final week based on standings, with #5 playing #6, #7 playing #8, etc. Some teams would end up playing each other twice during the season under this scenario, but that's not as horrible as the current mess. At least head-to-head results would determine the MACC teams and not some secret analytic formula know only to SSportSource Analytics and God.

Yeah, we don't need to go back to divisions.

The only glaring thing that needs to be addressed is the direct head-to-head result being acknowledged even if in a 3+-team tie not all teams played each other.

Championship teams take care of business against shitty conference opponents.

But I am stoked to go to some shitty bowl game!!!

The great thing about Reality is The Athletes and their Families enjoy the opportunity to attend and play in ANY Bowl Game while you complain from I’m sure Not Shitty Couch!

GO BOBCATS!!

If this end result can happen once, it can happen many more times down the road.

Hence, why specific changes to the tiebreaker system need to be made asap.

If the MAC doesn't even try to make any changes to this, we need to re-think why we're still in this conference.