All Activity

If the conference tournament is designed to make money ... the current format accomplishes that. If the MAC wants to reward the regular-season Champion, either don't have a tournament ... or seed the regular-season champion direct to the MAC TOURNAMENT CHAMPIONSHIP game. No in between bullshit. The rest of the league fights to play the champion. For the well-rested champion, it's one game, win or go home. Think of the crowd - both in the arena and on TV - on Saturday night to see if a rested undefeated Miami could finish the job, no matter what MAC team they played.

Both. But winning three games when everyone has equal rest vs winning two games with one or two less games than your opponent is a pretty clear advantage for the higher seed.

That is a legit argument, but my counter argument would be that a coach might find it wise to rest all valuable players dealing with a nagging injury once they secure a trip to Cleveland. What are the team’s priorities? It might cost the player some stats and accolades, but it will put the team in a better position to win in Cleveland. Players play through a lot of pain at times to win the conference title and get the best seeding. The problem is the MAC sends only one team to the NCAAT and the seeding has proven to not be much of an advantage. Recently Kent State and UMass have both been dangerous as the 8 seed. So the whole season is about playing your best and being healthy come March. And if it means dropping a few spots so be it. Better to go into MAC Tournament at full strength than a top seed currently. Can you imagine showing up at a Kent State v. Akron rivalry game with top players on both sides sitting out? I could Todelo doing this. Winning the conference has only gained them mockery.

The problem with the double bye is why have a tournament if 7 out of the 8 teams that make the tournament final over a 4 year period are the 1 & 2 seeds? The one that wasn't was the 3 seed. If the tournament becomes too predictable why would anyone care to watch unless you're a fan of one of those top 1-2 teams? Like I said before I'm against the idea of a double bye as it strips the MAC Tournament of the one thing that makes it exciting. I'm not opposed to entertaining options, like a 6 team tournament or re-seeding between rounds, that meets somewhere in the middle. Simply having a chalk tournament yearly defeats the purpose and that's what the double bye produced more often than not.

Did the format accomplish that goal or did the teams? The 2 seed hasn't missed a Championship Game yet in the current format. See my previous post for who the 1 seeds were that missed.

I think the MAC Tournament is one of the best run events in all of college basketball. I do like having the whole league participate with the lower seeds having play-in games on college campuses. Too often an 8th seed with a .500 record gets hot and healthy at the very end of the year. The current format gives them the same road as the teams carrying the weight of being the target all season long. Not fair. And because the MAC is usually a 1 bid league, I do favor giving the top seeds a bye. I agree that sometimes a bye will backfire because the opponent has the advantage of getting acclimated to the large arena. But more importantly, having to win 3 games in 3 days is just not ideal for anyone. You end up with the most resilient team, but not necessarily the best team. It would be nice if the MAC was given an at-large bid more often, when warranted.

It is a fact that during the double-bye era, the #1 and #2 seeds consistently made it to the championship game. If the goal of the MAC is to reward the top seeds for regular season performance and increase the odds of their champion being a top seed, that format absolutely accomplished that goal previously.

He’s a guy I’m excited about. The question is how quickly he’ll come along. Will he be ready to step in and contribute right away, or will it take a season or two? For comparison, I liked DeWalt coming out of JUCO, but it took him a full season to get comfortable and figure things out before everything clicked in year two. We seem to have good depth this year and there’s no denying Galloway’s upside, that’s for sure.

I really like Galloway Jr and definitely think he has the potential for it

Citing such simplistic data as the argument is like strictly using W/L for pitchers to determine the Cy Young Award winners. Explain the Sun Belt being a 1v10 in the Championship Game. How could that happen with the top 2-4 seeds being "rewarded" so heavily with their format? Let's not forget 3 of the 6 seasons in the current format have seen Toledo/Kowalchoke as the 1 seed. You could automatically crown them the Champions and they'd find a way to choke it away. 2021: 1 seed Toledo lost in the SF to 5 seed Ohio, who beat 2 seed Buffalo in the Finals and went on to win a game in the NCAAT with Jason Preston. 2022: 1 seed Toledo lost in the SF to Akron, who beat 2 seed PCCC in the Finals and almost beat UCLA in the NCAAT. 2023: 1 seed Toledo lost in the Finals to 2 seed PCCC. 2024: 1 seed Toledo lost in the QF to 8 seed PCCC, who went on to infamously lose the Finals to 2 seed Akron. 2025: 1 seed Akron wins the whole thing, including a thrilling Championship Game over 2 seed Miami OH. 2026: 1 seed Miami OH gets stunned in the QF by 8 seed UMass. 2 seed Akron won the Championship Game over 4 seed Toledo. In the 6 years of the current format, the Champion has been Akron 4x, PCCC 1x, and Ohio 1x. Akron and Ohio have been the Blue Bloods of the MAC for 2 decades, and PCCC has been a Powderpuff Blue Blood over that same time period. The 1 seeds have been Toledo 4x, Miami OH 1x, and Akron 1x. Toledo is fraudulent in March and a lot of people warned against taking Miami OH in their game vs UMass because of the matchup/fraud potential for Miami OH after flirting with many losses all season. The 2 seed has made the Championship Game all 6 seasons, further proving how bad Toledo/Kowalchoke are in March. If anything, the current format has proven that the best team(s) in March will rise to the top. The MAC Tournament has provided thrilling entertainment these last 6 years. Changing it would be silly.

From 2012-2015, the 1 and 2 seeds received byes to the semifinals. The championship games each of those years were: 2012: #3 Ohio over #1 Akron 2013: #1 Akron over #2 Ohio 2014: #1 WMU over #2 Toledo 2015: #2 Buffalo over #1 CMU In six years of the current format, the #1 seed has only won the tournament once, and only reached the championship game one other time. The format certainly doesn't preclude the top seeds from winning the tournament, but there was a clear reward for the top two teams during the double-bye era, given the championship game was #1 vs #2 in 3 of the 4 seasons.

We all knew it was coming but Richie Laryea has been named to the Canada roster for the World Cup!

My question is where does the conversation of the "reward" end? Personally, I think 1) having the most rest throughout the tournament and 2) getting to play the weaker teams the first couple rounds is already a pretty darn good reward. I don't believe a BYE is as rewarding as you believe. Letting the opponent get a game under their belt on a neutral court with new sightlines, etc., is a borderline disadvantage. If you want the regular season to matter more, you don't have a tournament. You have a regular season and a conference championship game - at most. Top 2 teams from the regular season play for a shot at making the dance. The tournament is a money grab - that's it. Trying to apply competitive logic to something solely built to line the pockets of the suits is a fool's errand.

Why wouldn't you reward the top seeds? Again, the MAC is the only conference - to my knowledge- that doesn't reward the #1 seed at all. Right now, the only thing that matters in the MAC regular season is finishing top 8. If a conference wants to make the regular season matter more and reward teams for playing well in the regular season, you should absolutely build your tournament that way. My preferred option would be to take the top 6 teams and give 1/2 a first round bye. It's not as extreme as the double-bye, but it makes earning the 1 or 2 valuable. Thursday 5 PM - #3 vs #6 7:30 PM - #4 vs #5 Friday 5 PM - 4/5 winner vs #1 7:30 PM - 3/6 winner vs #2 Saturday 7:30 - Championship

Note above ,,, meant to say NIT, not NCAA Tournament.

The only thing I'd do would be to add the bottom four seeds and play first rounds again (probably at home arenas, why not? If it's good enough for the CFP...) But seriously, getting a way around those damn Tuesday/Wednesday football games is a bigger problem than this.

Only way this works is if it's an even regular season conference schedule, which it will be going forward. Again, worthless conversation to have because the $$$ from Cleveland is too lucrative for the conference.

This. The basketball is absolutely fine (though moving to a 22-game league schedule would be fine). The football is closer to fine than we probably give it credit for, just for those midweek games that need to go the way of the dodo.

Money grab is right!!! So why f with it??? The 'reward' for winning the regular-season title is playing the No. 8 seed. No matter what you say, No. 1 should be able to defeat No. 8 even on a neutral court. If not, shame on you. If you go back to all 12 teams in the tournament. Top 4 get byes. And first round games on campus sites ... I think that (A) rewards the top 4 seeds with a bye, (B) gives all team a final chance at making the tournament ... and (C) still maintains the 3-games in 3-days in Cleveland. To me, that's the most fair scenario of all. If you want to add re-seeding after the first round, I'd be open to it. But beyond that what the MAC could actually do to 'reward' the No. 1 seed, is guarantee the MAC season champ (NOT THE HIGHEST REMAINING SEED) gets the league's auto bid to the NCAA Tournament ahead of any other team, plus the MAC pays to host an opening round NIT game. ADs really need to stop smelling themselves and screwing with a proven winning formula. EDIT: I meant to say 'auto bid to the NIT Tournament' ... it also has a very modest payout, which teams should be able to keep and not share. Combined with No. 1 seed, vs. No. 8 seed, in MAC Tournament and re-seeding after the first round, a trophy, a bag of chips .... and STILL getting rewarded with a modest NIT$$$ paycheck should be enough consolation for winning the regular season, but not the MAC Tournament. IMO. Per AI, in the NIT: Schools are given about \(\$4,000\) per game played, alongside having all of their travel, lodging, and tournament expenses covered. Additionally, host teams retain all gate receipts, parking, and concession revenues for their home games.

Where does the "reward the top 2 seeds" conversation stop? Why not simply let the regular season determine what the Championship Game is? Why have a tournament at all? The tournament is a money grab across the NCAA meaning the suits will always have the tournament. As long as we're having the tournament, the current format is the most fun. 4 games on Thursday starting at 11am is an absolute blast for basketball fans. Quit ruining what's fun in this country to extract every penny out of everything.

I'm fine with the MACT the way it is now. It's one of the best mid-major tournaments in all of college basketball. I do think a double bye takes away much of the intrigue by making the top 2 seeds over powered. I would entertain the idea of re-seeding teams each round and would at least listen to the argument of a 6 team tournament with top 2 seeds getting a first round bye.

And to the surprise of no one, as soon as a couple teams weren't as competitive as they magically thought they would be sans Louisville, the EBC will be itself dead in a couple years.

We'll have at least one Zip heading to Eugene for the national championships. Still a couple more opportunities for another to qualify but it's tough competition.

Looks like it may have been sold again.

I do not see it.