menu
Logo
Bobcat Attack Menu
Logo
Ohio Football Topic
Topic: Unofficial Official MACC Probabliities Thread
Page: 4 of 7
Jonesy1017
General User
J1017
Member Since: 5/15/2014
Location: Dublin, OH
Post Count: 85
J1017
mail
Jonesy1017
mail
Posted: 11/20/2025 3:40 PM
settings_applications edit_note
Mike Coleman wrote:expand_more
So...

after looking at these tiebreakers, who wants to move back to divisons?
I would be more down to have everyone play everyone in conference and clear up a lot of this stuff. 11 conference games (after NIU leaves) and 1 non-conference game. Would this ever happen? Of course not, but it would clear up a lot of the tiebreakers without breaking it out into divisions where a better team could still be on the outside looking in based on what division they are in
Ted Thompson
Administrator
Member Since: 11/11/2004
Location: MAC Play
Post Count: 7,960
mail
Ted Thompson
mail
Posted: 11/20/2025 4:32 PM
settings_applications edit_note
Ted Thompson
Administrator
Member Since: 11/11/2004
Location: MAC Play
Post Count: 7,960
mail
Ted Thompson
mail
Posted: 11/20/2025 4:37 PM
settings_applications edit_note

 

Shawn Sellers
General User
SS
Member Since: 1/5/2005
Location: Columbus, OH
Post Count: 228
SS
mail
Shawn Sellers
mail
Posted: 11/20/2025 5:27 PM
settings_applications edit_note
L.C. wrote:expand_more
C. Scenario – More than Two Teams

1. Combined head – to - head win percentage among the tied teams if all tied teams are common opponents.

2. If all the tied teams are not common opponents, the tied team that defeated each of the other tied teams advances.

3. Win percentage versus all common opponents.

4. The team with the higher ranking by the Team Rating Score metric provided by SportSource Analytics following the conclusion of regular season games.

5. Win percentage versus common opponents based upon their order of finish (overall conference win percentage, with ties broken) and proceeding through other common opponents based upon their order of finish.

https://getsomemaction.com/sports/2025/11/12/FB_111225543...

If they don't reset the list as teams eliminate then Miami would have shot.

WMU/CMU/Miami/Ohio

1) Doesn't apply not connected.
2) WMU 2-1, Ohio 1-1, Miami 1-1, CMU 0-1 (WMU moves on)
3) CMU/Miami/Ohio played only 3 in common: Buffalo, EMU, WMU
-Miami is 3-0 and Ohio/EMU are 2-1 (Miami moves on)
...

I don't understand this. It seems to me that 1 doesn't apply, as they aren't all connected, and 2 doesn't apply as no team beat all of the others, so you would end up at #3.

I guess I'll just wait and see how it actually plays out.
I believe you are correct. 1 and 2 don’t apply. So it moves on to
3. CMU/Miami/Ohio/WMU and I think the only common opponent of all of those is EMU. CMU/Miami/Ohio (1-0) , WMU (0-1) for scenario purposes. WMU out.

The thing I’m unclear about is what happens next. Do the 3 that remain start over at tiebreaker 1, or do they move on to tiebreaker 4
Last Edited: 11/20/2025 5:33:28 PM by Shawn Sellers
lovebobcat
General User
L
Member Since: 12/23/2004
Location: Cincinnati, OH
Post Count: 548
L
mail
lovebobcat
mail
Posted: 11/20/2025 10:46 PM
settings_applications edit_note
Mike Coleman wrote:expand_more
So...

after looking at these tiebreakers, who wants to move back to divisons?
Yes, please. It's better (and easier) to be able to follow the chase for a division title than to try to delineate a 4-way tie for second based on some kind of obscure fifth tiebreaker scenario. Especially since the league isn't putting out statements explaining the different possibilities with barely a week to go.
spongeBOB CATpants
General User
Member Since: 8/16/2016
Post Count: 1,352
mail
spongeBOB CATpants
mail
Posted: 11/21/2025 8:57 AM
settings_applications edit_note
What exactly is the benefit of getting rid of divisions? I'm sure its been discussed but I don't feel like digging it up. I'm guessing so its more of an even playing field instead of the same teams playing each other every year?
Jonesy1017
General User
J1017
Member Since: 5/15/2014
Location: Dublin, OH
Post Count: 85
J1017
mail
Jonesy1017
mail
Posted: 11/21/2025 9:15 AM
settings_applications edit_note
spongeBOB CATpants wrote:expand_more
What exactly is the benefit of getting rid of divisions? I'm sure its been discussed but I don't feel like digging it up. I'm guessing so its more of an even playing field instead of the same teams playing each other every year?
I believe it was to prevent a situation where there one division is significantly better than the other that results in a good 2nd place division team not making it over the other division leader even though they had a better conference record.

This was never really an issue from what I can tell, but last year it definitely would've been an issue if there were divisions and all the schedules stayed the same. In 2024, the first 4 teams were all previously MAC East teams and OU would have been left out of the conference title game at 7-1 and Western Michigan would have made it at 5-3
M.D.W.S.T
General User
Member Since: 12/24/2021
Post Count: 3,700
mail
M.D.W.S.T
mail
Posted: 11/21/2025 9:19 AM
settings_applications edit_note
Ted Thompson wrote:expand_more
HAPPY THURSDAY, EVERYONE.

THE NEW https://twitter.com/hashtag/MSCnarios?src=hash&ref_sr... HAVE DROPPED AND THINGS ARE MORE CLEAR THAN EVER.

Ball State, Buffalo and Kent State were eliminated this week. https://twitter.com/CMU_Football?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw has a REALLY good couple of viable paths. https://twitter.com/MiamiOHFootball?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw is in the drivers seat in a three way tie… https://t.co/CrJFdfQGwt https://t.co/DWLo0YKiZI&mdash ; The MAC Sports Connection (@TheMSCPodcast) https://twitter.com/TheMSCPodcast/status/1991550622299038...
Wait...

MIAMI wins the tiebreaker even if OU AND TOLEDO both win out?

Jesus take the wheel.
Andrew Ruck
General User
Member Since: 12/22/2004
Location: Columbus, OH
Post Count: 5,659
mail
Andrew Ruck
mail
Posted: 11/21/2025 9:21 AM
settings_applications edit_note
Jonesy1017 wrote:expand_more
So...
after looking at these tiebreakers, who wants to move back to divisons?
I would be more down to have everyone play everyone in conference and clear up a lot of this stuff. 11 conference games (after NIU leaves) and 1 non-conference game. Would this ever happen? Of course not, but it would clear up a lot of the tiebreakers without breaking it out into divisions where a better team could still be on the outside looking in based on what division they are in
You're on the right track. You should never be in the same division/conference as someone and not play them. I think all conferences should be just 10 teams and play a 9 game round robin, 18 game double round robin in basketball. These massive conferences with 8 game schedules are so painfully dumb to me.
STVCastle
General User
Member Since: 5/23/2025
Post Count: 359
mail
STVCastle
mail
Posted: 11/21/2025 10:50 AM
settings_applications edit_note
Ted Thompson wrote:expand_more
HAPPY THURSDAY, EVERYONE.

THE NEW https://twitter.com/hashtag/MSCnarios?src=hash&ref_sr... HAVE DROPPED AND THINGS ARE MORE CLEAR THAN EVER.

Ball State, Buffalo and Kent State were eliminated this week. https://twitter.com/CMU_Football?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw has a REALLY good couple of viable paths. https://twitter.com/MiamiOHFootball?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw is in the drivers seat in a three way tie… https://t.co/CrJFdfQGwt https://t.co/DWLo0YKiZI&mdash ; The MAC Sports Connection (@TheMSCPodcast) https://twitter.com/TheMSCPodcast/status/1991550622299038...
^ I'm convinced this guy on X isn't interpreting the tiebreaking procedures correctly. It's like something is staring him right in the face, but he's not seeing it and still keeping Miami in the equation.
STVCastle
General User
Member Since: 5/23/2025
Post Count: 359
mail
STVCastle
mail
Posted: 11/21/2025 11:48 AM
settings_applications edit_note
C. Scenario – More than Two Teams
1. Combined head – to - head win percentage among the tied teams if all tied teams are common opponents.

2. If all the tied teams are not common opponents, the tied team that defeated each of the other tied teams advances.

-----

^ I've been reading these parts carefully.

Specifically, #2; Toledo and Ohio are common opponents to Miami, but not common to each other, so not all 3 tied teams are common.

If we go by combined head-to-head among the tied teams:
Toledo 1-0 (beat Miami)
Ohio 1-0 (beat Miami)
Miami 0-2 (nothing, zip)

Miami didn't get it done on the field against the teams they'd be tied with. I'm seeing #2 being used first. (Still doesn't help us because of Toledo.)

Why is The MAC Sports Connection guy not seeing this? And skipping over to #3-7?
mf279801
General User
M279801
Member Since: 8/6/2010
Location: Newark, DE
Post Count: 2,486
M279801
mail
mf279801
mail
Posted: 11/21/2025 11:14 PM
settings_applications edit_note
Shawn Sellers wrote:expand_more
C. Scenario – More than Two Teams

1. Combined head – to - head win percentage among the tied teams if all tied teams are common opponents.

2. If all the tied teams are not common opponents, the tied team that defeated each of the other tied teams advances.

3. Win percentage versus all common opponents.

4. The team with the higher ranking by the Team Rating Score metric provided by SportSource Analytics following the conclusion of regular season games.

5. Win percentage versus common opponents based upon their order of finish (overall conference win percentage, with ties broken) and proceeding through other common opponents based upon their order of finish.

https://getsomemaction.com/sports/2025/11/12/FB_111225543...

If they don't reset the list as teams eliminate then Miami would have shot.

WMU/CMU/Miami/Ohio

1) Doesn't apply not connected.
2) WMU 2-1, Ohio 1-1, Miami 1-1, CMU 0-1 (WMU moves on)
3) CMU/Miami/Ohio played only 3 in common: Buffalo, EMU, WMU
-Miami is 3-0 and Ohio/EMU are 2-1 (Miami moves on)
...

I don't understand this. It seems to me that 1 doesn't apply, as they aren't all connected, and 2 doesn't apply as no team beat all of the others, so you would end up at #3.

I guess I'll just wait and see how it actually plays out.
I believe you are correct. 1 and 2 don’t apply. So it moves on to
3. CMU/Miami/Ohio/WMU and I think the only common opponent of all of those is EMU. CMU/Miami/Ohio (1-0) , WMU (0-1) for scenario purposes. WMU out.

The thing I’m unclear about is what happens next. Do the 3 that remain start over at tiebreaker 1, or do they move on to tiebreaker 4
They start over at step 1. (If multiple teams are eliminated on a step, the remaining teams revert to step 1, or step 1 of the "if two teams are tied" procedures)
mf279801
General User
M279801
Member Since: 8/6/2010
Location: Newark, DE
Post Count: 2,486
M279801
mail
mf279801
mail
Posted: 11/21/2025 11:20 PM
settings_applications edit_note
STVCastle wrote:expand_more
C. Scenario – More than Two Teams
1. Combined head – to - head win percentage among the tied teams if all tied teams are common opponents.

2. If all the tied teams are not common opponents, the tied team that defeated each of the other tied teams advances.

-----

^ I've been reading these parts carefully.

Specifically, #2; Toledo and Ohio are common opponents to Miami, but not common to each other, so not all 3 tied teams are common.

If we go by combined head-to-head among the tied teams:
Toledo 1-0 (beat Miami)
Ohio 1-0 (beat Miami)
Miami 0-2 (nothing, zip)

Miami didn't get it done on the field against the teams they'd be tied with. I'm seeing #2 being used first. (Still doesn't help us because of Toledo.)

Why is The MAC Sports Connection guy not seeing this? And skipping over to #3-7?
1) Combined head-to-head among the tied teams IF ALL TIED TEAMS ARE COMMON OPPONENTS ------Ohio and Toledo didn't play each other ---> all tied teams are NOT common opponents ----> #1 does not apply

2) If all the tied teams are not common opponents, the tied team that DEFEATED each of the other tied teams advances. ----> None of the tied teams defeated both of the other tied teams ----> proceed to Tiebreaker #3

No where do the rules say "The team that LOST to each of the other tied teams is eliminated". The rule probably SHOULD say that, and I've seen tie-breakers in other conferences that DO have a "2.b. Team that lost to all the other tied teams is eliminated" type of rule, but as written that is not included in the MAC tiebreaker procedures.
bobcatsquared
General User
B
Member Since: 12/20/2004
Post Count: 5,853
B
mail
bobcatsquared
mail
Posted: 11/22/2025 12:01 PM
settings_applications edit_note
Mike Coleman wrote:expand_more
So...

after looking at these tiebreakers, who wants to move back to divisons?
The disparity in conference schedules in an 18-team conference (big10) is obviously going to be greater than a 13-team conference (MAC).

Looking at the 5 teams in the big10 with 1 or 0 conference losses: indiana, osu and um play only one of the other teams in this group while usc and oregon play two such opponents. Iowa, on the outside of this group with a 4-3 record, has 3 of these opponents on its schedule.

Considering the top 9 teams (.500 record or better) in the 16-team SEC: texas a&m and ole miss play only 2 games against teams in this group; while bama and oklahoma have to play 5 such games. A huge advantage for texas a&m and ole miss, no?

Now, for the MAC I looked at the top 6 teams, all above .500 in the conference: wmu and miami both played 4 games v. other teams in this group while Ohio, cmu, ut and ub play 3 such games.

If I don't consider UB and just teams with 1 or 2 losses: wmu still has 4 games against the other teams, miami and ut play 3 such opponents and Ohio and cmu 2 each.

Ohio's conference schedule should have been to its advantage. As others have pointed out on BA, just beat ball st.
Last Edited: 11/22/2025 12:03:30 PM by bobcatsquared
STVCastle
General User
Member Since: 5/23/2025
Post Count: 359
mail
STVCastle
mail
Posted: 11/22/2025 3:29 PM
settings_applications edit_note
I'll just summarize by saying I don't approve of this MAC tiebreaking system overall. It's set up to easily confuse people.
L.C.
General User
LC
Member Since: 9/1/2005
Post Count: 10,584
LC
mail
L.C.
mail
Posted: 11/22/2025 6:24 PM
settings_applications edit_note
Did the Ball State loss to Toledo eliminate Ohio?
Mike Coleman
Administrator
Member Since: 12/21/2004
Location: Near the Pristine Sandy Shores of Lake Erie, OH
Post Count: 2,002
mail
Mike Coleman
mail
Posted: 11/22/2025 6:27 PM
settings_applications edit_note
L.C. wrote:expand_more
Did the Ball State loss to Toledo eliminate Ohio?
Who knows. But it's safe to assume the Ball State win v. Ohio will eventually eliminate Ohio.
Mike Coleman
Administrator
Member Since: 12/21/2004
Location: Near the Pristine Sandy Shores of Lake Erie, OH
Post Count: 2,002
mail
Mike Coleman
mail
Posted: 11/22/2025 6:28 PM
settings_applications edit_note
bobcatsquared wrote:expand_more
So...

after looking at these tiebreakers, who wants to move back to divisons?
The disparity in conference schedules in an 18-team conference (big10) is obviously going to be greater than a 13-team conference (MAC).

Looking at the 5 teams in the big10 with 1 or 0 conference losses: indiana, osu and um play only one of the other teams in this group while usc and oregon play two such opponents. Iowa, on the outside of this group with a 4-3 record, has 3 of these opponents on its schedule.

Considering the top 9 teams (.500 record or better) in the 16-team SEC: texas a&m and ole miss play only 2 games against teams in this group; while bama and oklahoma have to play 5 such games. A huge advantage for texas a&m and ole miss, no?

Now, for the MAC I looked at the top 6 teams, all above .500 in the conference: wmu and miami both played 4 games v. other teams in this group while Ohio, cmu, ut and ub play 3 such games.

If I don't consider UB and just teams with 1 or 2 losses: wmu still has 4 games against the other teams, miami and ut play 3 such opponents and Ohio and cmu 2 each.

Ohio's conference schedule should have been to its advantage. As others have pointed out on BA, just beat ball st.
Very well said.
Athens
General User
A
Member Since: 12/20/2004
Location: Alexandria, VA
Post Count: 5,459
A
mail
Athens
mail
Posted: 11/22/2025 6:42 PM
settings_applications edit_note
STVCastle wrote:expand_more
I'll just summarize by saying I don't approve of this MAC tiebreaking system overall. It's set up to easily confuse people.
They did simplify it for this year moving analytics up ahead of rank order opponent tie-breakers. They need more clarity on tie-breaker #2. It should read the tied team with the most wins over the other tied teams moves on since the teams are not connected. This is what I believe that tie-breaker is supposed to read anyways.
Ted Thompson
Administrator
Member Since: 11/11/2004
Location: MAC Play
Post Count: 7,960
mail
Ted Thompson
mail
Posted: 11/22/2025 6:57 PM
settings_applications edit_note
L.C. wrote:expand_more
Did the Ball State loss to Toledo eliminate Ohio?
No?

Per the Tweet earlier in this thread:

- Ohio wins vs. Buffalo

- NIU wins vs. Kent State

- Ball State wins vs. Miami

- Central Michigan wins vs. Toledo
77 Mulberry
General User
77M
Member Since: 12/25/2013
Post Count: 70
77M
mail
77 Mulberry
mail
Posted: 11/22/2025 9:27 PM
settings_applications edit_note
Ball State's loss to Toledo does not eliminate Ohio from contention for the MAC Championship. With Toledo's victory, the Rockets are now in a five-way tie for second place in the MAC at 5-2 in conference play, while Ohio remains in the playoff race.

Current Standings and Implications
Toledo: 7-4 overall, 5-2 MAC (currently tied for second place)
Ohio: Still viable in the playoff race, depending on the outcomes of remaining games.
As it stands, Ohio can still qualify for the MAC Championship depending on how the final games unfold, particularly with Western Michigan leading the conference at 6-1.
L.C.
General User
LC
Member Since: 9/1/2005
Post Count: 10,584
LC
mail
L.C.
mail
Posted: 11/22/2025 10:28 PM
settings_applications edit_note
Ted Thompson wrote:expand_more
Did the Ball State loss to Toledo eliminate Ohio?
No?

Per the Tweet earlier in this thread:

- Ohio wins vs. Buffalo

- NIU wins vs. Kent State

- Ball State wins vs. Miami

- Central Michigan wins vs. Toledo

OK, I was looking at a different tweet in the thread that said BSU had to beat Toledo and Toledo then had to beat CMU. So many different statements on this... No doubt someone has all the tiebreakers figured out correctly, but whom? As someone above said, Gamblers almost certainly have it right.

I found these odds:
https://www.fanduel.com/research/college-football-2025-ma...
WMU +130
Miami +165
Toledo +290
CMU +1700
Ohio +6000
Last Edited: 11/23/2025 9:28:04 AM by L.C.
postlikeTrent
General User
T
Member Since: 3/2/2005
Post Count: 31
T
mail
postlikeTrent
mail
Posted: 11/23/2025 9:20 AM
settings_applications edit_note
OK, unless I did something wrong...it looks like its coming down to point differential vs Central (assuming we beat Buffalo).
We have tiebreaker over Miami by virtue of our win.
Western has the tiebreaker over us by virtue of their win.
Toledo is +160 points in conference, Central is +79; we are +71. We would end up going to that tie breaker with the winner of their game.
So bottom line: We win; Then we need Central to beat Toledo. And we need to beat Buffalo by 9 more than the margin of Central's win.
It doesn't seem that likely but it's not impossible....
Last Edited: 11/23/2025 9:31:45 AM by postlikeTrent
Clown Ohio Fan
General User
COF
Member Since: 1/7/2022
Post Count: 350
COF
mail
Clown Ohio Fan
mail
Posted: 11/23/2025 11:43 AM
settings_applications edit_note
It's pretty obvious right now...

The tiebreakers are silly and ridiculous but Miami gets in if there's a 3-way tiebreaker between them, Toledo and us because of the stupid common opponents BS and not eliminating MU despite them losing to Toledo and us.

Toledo gets in with a win and either a Ohio or Miami loss.

Ohio basically needs a crazy miracle at this point.
Last Edited: 11/23/2025 11:50:23 AM by Clown Ohio Fan
mf279801
General User
M279801
Member Since: 8/6/2010
Location: Newark, DE
Post Count: 2,486
M279801
mail
mf279801
mail
Posted: 11/23/2025 3:41 PM
settings_applications edit_note
postlikeTrent wrote:expand_more
OK, unless I did something wrong...it looks like its coming down to point differential vs Central (assuming we beat Buffalo).
We have tiebreaker over Miami by virtue of our win.
Western has the tiebreaker over us by virtue of their win.
Toledo is +160 points in conference, Central is +79; we are +71. We would end up going to that tie breaker with the winner of their game.
So bottom line: We win; Then we need Central to beat Toledo. And we need to beat Buffalo by 9 more than the margin of Central's win.
It doesn't seem that likely but it's not impossible....
That's what my spreadsheet says too, except according to the MAC website and media reports the 2nd to last tiebreaker is "SportsSource Analytics’ Team Rating Score" rather than scoring margin...but scoring margin likely figures in heavily.

To get there, I THINK we need:
Ohio over Buffalo
NIU over Kent
CMU over Toledo
EITHER (1) EMU over WMU
OR (2) WMU over EMU AND Ball State over Miami

*** And note: that is to get us into a situation where CMU and we are tied on "Opponent cumulative winning percentage" and the 2nd championship game participant is determined by SportsSource analytics.***

Has anyone else out there run the numbers/checked the remaining 64-possible ways that the season can unfold? Am I wrong/missing something?
Showing Messages: 76 - 100 of 172
reply
vertical_align_top
vertical_align_center
vertical_align_bottom
add_comment
chevron_backward
chevron_forward
MAC News Links
chevron_left
Friday, June 5, 2026
chevron_right



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