Let'sGoZips94

I didn't mean a carbon copy event. Simply playing top OOC mid major competition in January/February. If it takes multiple games in one event, do it. Get an event going where 3 games are played between 6 of the highest NET mid majors. Otherwise, campus site games will do just fine.

#1 Michigan plays #3 Duke on Saturday at a neutral site game in Washington DC. It's pathetic that mid majors aren't doing something like this to help themselves.

Do you know how much heartbreak and angst they could've saved their fanbase over the years by announcing in February that they will not be participating in the NCAA Tournament?

Thank you for this context. Was unaware of Freitag's absence.

Buffalo just lost at home to NIU. They are no longer in my "I fear them" category.

Akron vs Ohio, Kent vs UMass on the same side is diabolical. If Miami avoids all those teams until the final, it will be confirmed they sold their soul for this run of luck.

Shammah is deadly with buzzer beaters.

The one guy just asked if plentiful is a word. I don't think a promotion is in order no matter how much they pump up the Zips.

If the ADs at Ball State and Sac State are smart, they strike a deal with Manscaped to sponsor their matchups.

Somehow need UMass to be the 4th, 5th, or 8th seed to get onto the Sweaters side of the bracket. Or... Miami drops 2 to any combination of UMass/BG/Toledo/Ohio (I don't see them losing otherwise) and Akron wins out to take the 1 seed. Separation is occurring between Buffalo and the rest of the field for the 8th seed. The tournament field might be set here soon if Balls, Central, Northern, and Eastern don't find some magic.

Official. Sac State joining the MAC.

That style offense is what I've been wanting. High octane, lots of movement, lots of opportunities. Most teams won't be able to keep up, as we saw last night. We don't even have to shoot particularly well. Keep this style up.

I doubt they're in the MAC for 3-4 Akron trips out there. MAC schools don't play each other every year and every other game is at home. Could be 8+ years before we make that trip 3-4x.

Injecting $15m into the conference is a nice consolation for being "devalued." Not sure how much more the MAC could've been devalued anyways; the MAC has been on a "joke" trajectory for a couple decades.

Because $15m is a rich buy in for the MAC and it gives the MAC an entirely new market for their new tv deal negotiations that will start soon. The current tv deal ends after the 2026-2027 season. Curious to see if this is the last of the additions or if they get even more aggressive.

$15m buy in is massive. Sac State has wanted to get to the FBS level and this is an aggressive way to do it.

Serb will be needed for his 5 fouls at this rate. This needs sent to the MAC for review. The refs should be suspended for how they've handled this game.

Refs are absolutely the worst.

Hefty buy in fee. Sac State (not Ball State) has invested very heavily in athletics recently.

I know this is a football only member but this is interesting for basketball. Does this open the door the MAC to add basketball only members?

Speaking of tickets, does anyone need a ticket? I won't be able to make this one.

I want more Serb. I want more Hardman. I want more speed on offense. I want more shot attempts. I want to get back to the early season system that outpaced opponents and it didn't matter how teams shot because we were able to dictate the style and keep up.

Today's landscape doesn't allow for these types of parameters. Princeton and James Madison are the perfect example. Akron's OOC should've been much better than it has turned out to be because of those 2.

The P6 aren't necessarily why I would tweak the schedule in this manner. It's the mid majors that would be the focus and if they were smart, they'd all come together to make this change. If they could open up 4-5 dates in January/February that allows for flex games based on a mutual agreement among several conferences to match up similarly ranked (NET) schools, that would be incredibly beneficial for all parties.