ESPN Bracketolgy

[akzipper]

 

UNC Wilmington is a 12 seed, but Akron is 13?

 

 

UNC Wilmington (RPI 45 / Lost 3 of last 5 games)

Akron (RPI 37)

 

 

[LZIp]

A 12 or 13 seed in Buffalo would be pretty legit!

[kreed5120]

I have no problem with UNC-Wilm being ahead of us. They have 3 RPI top 100 wins and 0 RPI 150+ losses. Just keep winning and we'll play ourselves into a 12 or maybe even an 11 seed.

[skip-zip]

32 minutes ago, kreed5120 said:

Just keep winning and we'll play ourselves into a 12 or maybe even an 11 seed.

 

You got it, Kreed.  Just keep posting wins, and our situation is just going to keep getting better.  And there's still a lot more potential wins to be had in the next several weeks.   The fact that we've climbed so much in the week following the OU loss is still pretty surprising.  

 

For me, I'd still love to target that #9 seed that Kent got when they were 28-7

[zippyfan34]

2 Votes in the coaches poll

[tolbob]

8 hours ago, kreed5120 said:

I have no problem with UNC-Wilm being ahead of us. They have 3 RPI top 100 wins and 0 RPI 150+ losses. Just keep winning and we'll play ourselves into a 12 or maybe even an 11 seed.

 

KenPom has UNC Wilmington at 56 while the Zips are 99.  Need to keep wining.

[zipsrule]

24 minutes ago, tolbob said:

 

KenPom has UNC Wilmington at 56 while the Zips are 99.  Need to keep wining.

Need to keep whining or winning?  

[zippy_ua_00]

14 hours ago, skip-zip said:

 

You got it, Kreed.  Just keep posting wins, and our situation is just going to keep getting better.  And there's still a lot more potential wins to be had in the next several weeks.   The fact that we've climbed so much in the week following the OU loss is still pretty surprising.  

 

For me, I'd still love to target that #9 seed that Kent got when they were 28-7

I doubt that will happen. Kent had some nice wins vs st Mary's and St. Louis that year.

[skip-zip]

4 hours ago, zippy_ua_00 said:

I doubt that will happen. Kent had some nice wins vs st Mary's and St. Louis that year.

 

It's worth looking at...

 

St. Mary's was a quality win because they were in the Top 50.

But St. Louis?  They had a #138 RPI.  

 

I'd be happy if we can get to that 28 win total, which would match them.  Then we'd also have to get down about 10 more spots in the RPI to get near where they were in that category as well.  

 

They definitely set a lofty standard with that #9 seed.  But I also find it interesting that the committee was actually fair, or maybe even overly generous to a MAC team, for a change.

[kreed5120]

If I counted right Kent beat 7 rpi top 100 teams that year; Cleveland State, St. Mary's, George Mason, Ohio, and Akron x 3. Akron has 0 top 100 to date and have no way of picking up any unless a team like Ohio wins enough down the stretch to move and even then it would be 1, 2 if they were to meet in tourney. No way Akron climbs to a 9 seed.

Edited February 14, 2017 by kreed5120

[skip-zip]

3 hours ago, kreed5120 said:

If I counted right Kent beat 7 rpi top 100 teams that year; Cleveland State, St. Mary's, George Mason, Ohio, and Akron x 3. Akron has 0 top 100 to date and have no way of picking up any

 

If you remember that era in MAC basketball, there were a ton of really bad teams.  Some years, the entire West sucked, which eventually prompted a rule change so that the West leader did not automatically get the #2 seed in the tournament.  That has to explain why you're pointing out all of the Top level teams that Kent played that year, but they still had a really high overall SOS.   Those horrible MAC teams at the time really weighed everyone down at that time.  In fact, that seemed like a very wise strategy for Kent to go out and schedule those tough OOC that year to try to counterbalance that.  

 

I don't want to begin another discussion here about scheduling.  I already support MUCH better scheduling for us.  I'm only looking at our #36 RPI and 21-4 record, and comparing that to 2008 Kent.  We're ahead of their pace that year in wins, right now.  And we're behind their pace that year in losses, right now.  I don't know how their RPI that year in mid-February compares to ours right now, but I can see that we certainly still need to win a lot more games to equal their end-of-season RPI.  

 

  

Edited February 14, 2017 by skip-zip

[kreed5120]

4 minutes ago, skip-zip said:

 

If you remember that era in MAC basketball, there were a ton of really bad teams.  Some years, the entire West sucked, which eventually prompted a rule change so that the West leader did not automatically get the #2 seed in the tournament.  That has to explain why you're pointing out all of the Top level teams that Kent played that year, but they still had a really high overall SOS.   Those horrible MAC teams at the time really weighed everyone down at that time.  In fact, that seemed like a very wise strategy for Kent to go out and schedule those tough OOC that year to try to counterbalance that.  

 

I don't want to begin another discussion here about scheduling.  I already support MUCH better scheduling for us.  I'm only looking at our #36 RPI and 21-4 record, and comparing that to 2008 Kent.  We're ahead of their pace that year in wins, right now.  And we're behind their pace that year in losses, right now.  I don't know how their RPI that year in mid-February compares to ours right now, but I can see that we certainly still need to win a lot more games to equal their end-of-season RPI.  

 

  

These are the sheets everyone on the selection committee is provided by the NCAA for the selection process. I get that today the bottom of the MAC is better than what it was 10 years ago. The thing is when it comes to selection time it is better to be a top heavy conference. They group all teams 200+ plus signifying there isn't that great of a difference between the 250th rated team and the 325th rated team. There is however a big difference between the 50th rated team and the 125th. The fact the MAC is filled with a bunch of mediocre teams instead of another 2-3 good to great ones hurts Akron.

 

https://extra.ncaa.org/solutions/rpi/Stats Library/Feb. 11 Team Sheets.pdf

https://extra.ncaa.org/solutions/rpi/Stats Library/Feb. 11 Nitty Gritty.pdf

[skip-zip]

43 minutes ago, kreed5120 said:

The fact the MAC is filled with a bunch of mediocre teams instead of another 2-3 good to great ones hurts Akron.

 

I'm not sure if it helps to discuss whether it's better to have more good teams, or less bad teams, when determining the strength of a conference.   

 

I was only pointing out that Kent's SOS was really impacted in 2008 by those horrible teams in the bottom half of the MAC, despite the fact that they went out and scheduled so many top level teams that year.  But obviously their overall formula worked well for them that year.  I'd like to see us do something similar.  But for this year, all we can do is look at what we can accomplish with what we have in front of us.  And we have no option except to post an eye-opening win total, and hope for the best, like I said previously.    

[skip-zip]

On 2/13/2017 at 11:16 AM, kreed5120 said:

Just keep winning and we'll play ourselves into a 12 or maybe even an 11 seed.

 

I was just thinking about this.  We've had some bad luck over the years.  But, wouldn't it suck if we were fortunate enough to get to an 11 seed, but then have to play a Tuesday night game in Dayton just to get into the showcase games on Thursday and Friday?

 

I think I'd rather be 12.  

[zippy5]

I don't believe an auto-bid would play in the first 4

[kreed5120]

23 minutes ago, skip-zip said:

 

I'm not sure if it helps to discuss whether it's better to have more good teams, or less bad teams, when determining the strength of a conference.   

 

I was only pointing out that Kent's SOS was really impacted in 2008 by those horrible teams in the bottom half of the MAC, despite the fact that they went out and scheduled so many top level teams that year.  But obviously their overall formula worked well for them that year.  I'd like to see us do something similar.  But for this year, all we can do is look at what we can accomplish with what we have in front of us.  And we have no option except to post an eye-opening win total, and hope for the best, like I said previously.    

I was just stating I don't feel we have the ability to reach a 9 seed. Kent State resume in '08 will end up being a lot better than ours no matter how strong we finish.

[kreed5120]

19 minutes ago, zippy5 said:

I don't believe an auto-bid would play in the first 4

We would have to be an auto-bid 16th seed, which won't happen, to play in Dayton. The other Dayton play-in games go to the last 4 at-large teams. 

[skip-zip]

8 minutes ago, kreed5120 said:

We would have to be an auto-bid 16th seed, which won't happen, to play in Dayton. The other Dayton play-in games go to the last 4 at-large teams. 

 

Correct.  

 

But you said earlier that we could maybe play ourselves into an 11 seed, which means that we'd have to lose the MAC Tournament, and I don't even want to think about facing that scenario unless it happens.  

Edited February 14, 2017 by skip-zip

[kreed5120]

Quote

Akron [21-4 (11-1), RPI: 39, SOS: 181] The Zips, who have a raw RPI number worthy of consideration, went 2-0 last week, and it doesn't cost us anything to keep them on here. But with all 20 of their wins coming against teams outside the top-100, no current top-100 teams in their league and an average opponent RPI (as of Monday) of 218, well, it ain't looking good.

 

http://m.espn.com/ncb/bubblewatch?src=desktop&rand=ref~{"ref"%3A"https%3A%2F%2Fwww.google.co.uk%2F"}&wjb

Edited February 14, 2017 by kreed5120

[zippy5]

45 minutes ago, skip-zip said:

 

Correct.  

 

But you said earlier that we could maybe play ourselves into an 11 seed, which means that we'd have to lose the MAC Tournament, and I don't even want to think about facing that scenario unless it happens.  

Why does being an 11 seed mean we lost in the MAC tourney?

[kreed5120]

46 minutes ago, skip-zip said:

 

Correct.  

 

But you said earlier that we could maybe play ourselves into an 11 seed, which means that we'd have to lose the MAC Tournament, and I don't even want to think about facing that scenario unless it happens.  

I was just answering zippy5 question. I don't think we get into the tournament unless we win the MACT. By us playing ourselves into an 11 seed, I meant I feel we could get an 11 seed if we were to run the table. In said case we wouldn't be playing in Dayton.

[skip-zip]

9 minutes ago, zippy5 said:

Why does being an 11 seed mean we lost in the MAC tourney?

 

Kreed explained it above.  It's the spots for the last 4 teams that got At-Large bids.  

 

I've been to the play-in games.  They were a lot of fun, and Dayton fans support it well.  But, the Nation isn't paying much attention until Thursday at Noon.  That's why I said I'd rather be a 12 than an 11 seed.  

Edited February 14, 2017 by skip-zip

[kreed5120]

6 minutes ago, skip-zip said:

 

Kreed explained it above.  It's the spots for the last 4 teams that got At-Large bids.  

The play-in game can feature a 12 vs.12 match-up. It all just depends on how many AQ teams they feel are ahead of the last few at-large teams. If lets say UNC-Wilm and Akron climbed above 2 at-large teams they (Akron/UNC-Wilm) would both get an 11 seed and the play-in game would feature 2 12 seeds.

Edited February 14, 2017 by kreed5120

[zippy5]

Not all 11s are at-larges. We could play ourselves up to an 11 and still be an auto-bid

[skip-zip]

4 minutes ago, kreed5120 said:

The play-in game can feature a 12 vs.12 match-up. It all just depends on how many 1 bid conference teams they feel are ahead of the last few at-large teams.

 

I don't know that. Maybe you're right.  All I can see is that both At-Large play-in games have been between 11 Seeds the last few years.