kreed5120
-
Posts
5,816 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
107
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Gallery
Blogs
Posts posted by kreed5120
-
-
I've seen some questionable ABJ articles in my time, but I actually didn't mind this one. It presented hard numbers so that we could see what attendance really was. I could have used without the long rant on how the stadium is a huge money pit. I feel we all get that at this point. No need to print a new article about it every 2-3 months. At some point you just have to accept it is here and there is little to nothing that can be done about it. The money has already been spent.
-
London Fletcher was a 4X Pro Bowler out of John Carroll and measured in at 5'10. Not saying Brown will be the next Fletcher as those would be some big shoes to fill, but if some team feels he can ball, they will find a spot for him.
At worst a dude that can run a 4.47 40 with the tackling skills of a linebacker would have to seem like a valuable special teams player.
-
58 minutes ago, GJGood said:
I know the NCAA is what we all want but lets take it one step at a time. Winning the MAC regular season title guarantees us of at least an NIT berth. That is a lot better than the CBI, CiT, or sitting at home. Those options will be where we will find most of our MAC brethren in the postseason.
Nothing is guaranteed, but it would take an incredible collapse for the Zips to not win the regular season title. They have a full 2 game lead with 6 games left and perhaps the easiest remaining schedule in the MAC. Of those 6, 4 are at home where they have yet to lose this season. 3 of them are against perhaps the 2 worst teams in the entire MAC in MIA and BG, Another 2 are against Ken+ who the injury bug has gotten the best of and have lost 4 out of their last 5. Even if the Zips were to lose 2-3 games, have any of those 7-5 MAC teams shown the ability to win 6 straight to steal the regular season title?
The Zips currently sit #2 in 3PM per game and 14th in 3P%. That being said anything short of a NCAA tournament berth would have to feel like a disappointment because you would hate to see all that shooting go to waste. I don't think they are guaranteed to win the berth as MAC teams have shown the ability to beat them this season, but I'm confident they will be in a position to finish no worse than the NIT.
-
2
-
-
31 minutes ago, skip-zip said:
Again, it is when you have to consider that the competitor is a step up too. Essentially, you're matching a team that's as many as 4 spots higher (one seed level) with a team 4 spots lower. That's the point. You can call it insignificant, if you like. For that matter, you could also say that #68 and #1 isn't a significant difference because there's another 300 teams that were worse.
If a #1 seed actually played the 68th best team, we would have seen a 16 seed beat a 1 by this point. Those 16 seeds come from awful conferences and are more like the 200th best team and that might be me being generous. A 12 seed typically features some of the best mid-major teams plus the final 1-2 at-large teams. 11 seeds are typically bubble teams that squeezed themselves in. After you get past the top dozen or so serious contenders, teams 20-30 aren't that far apart. If you don't believe me, just look at how often teams juggle in the AP poll.
Edit: 6 seeds are 4-3 vs 7 seeds. Small sample size, but it just goes to show how even those teams are.
-
1
-
-
11 minutes ago, skip-zip said:
But you're forgetting to factor in that the 12/5 games were SUPPOSED to be much bigger mismatches than the 11/6 game. You're talking about teams that were separated by 5 spots in the seeding process, and teams that were separated by 7 spots. Big difference.
So, the fact that they are nearly equal in upsets seems to validate why so many people talk about those 12/5 games, and the reasons why they are a matchup where so many upsets occur.
As a fan though it makes little difference if you're an 11th or 12th seed, however, you should be hoping for a 10 seed or better. In general I feel there isn't much of a talent gap between an 11th & 12th seed just like there isn't much of a talent gap between a 6th and 7th seed. Once you start getting into the 13th and 14th seeds, you begin seeing teams that aren't really 1 of the best 68 teams in the country but got in by winning a mediocre to bad conference.
-
25 minutes ago, skip-zip said:
There's actually been A LOT of 12 vs. 5 upsets over the years. In fact, many people have said that these games usually see a good mid-major conference tournament champ playing against a team that finished a few rungs down in the standings in a major conference. It's been a spot that's been ripe for upsets many times over the years.
You would think that the committee would maybe take this as a message that more of those high achievers in the "less recognized" conferences were possibly deserving of more tournament bids? Not a chance.
12 seeds have gone 47-97 (32.6%) vs. 5 seeds.
11 seeds have gone 49-95 (34%) vs. 6 seeds
10 seeds have gone 58-90 (39.2%) vs. 7 seeds
9 seeds have gone 69-79 (46.6%) vs. 8 seeds
Moral of the story is there is little difference between an 11 and 12 seed odds of winning, but a sizeable boost in a 9 & 10 seed winning.
http://mcubed.net/ncaab/seeds.shtml
Edit:
To expand on my above post 13 seeds win 19.5% vs. 4 seeds and 14 seeds win only 16.1% vs. 3 seeds.
-
13 minutes ago, Bubba4three said:
Seems to me Bobcat fans would know better than anyone here what a Sweet 16 team looks like.
+1 Savage
-
32 minutes ago, zipsoutsider said:
In the article, he said ideally, a team would create a hybrid position for him, somewhere between linebacker and safety. I would not be at all surprised to see that happen.
With all the hybrid defense packages in the NFL these days, I wouldn't be surprised if that position already exists. I could see some team that feels he could fit their scheme reaching for him a round or 2 earlier than what many experts expect.
I wish him the best of luck.
-
The Zips are still in an excellent position to win the regular season MAC title and #1 overall seed in the MACC. They are up 2 games with 6 remaining. Of those 6, 4 are at the JAR a place the Zips have yet to lose at this season. A strong regular season finish plus a MACC win should still give them a decent seed come tourney time.
I'm confident they will hang onto the 2 game lead. Best case scenario is the Zips win out and enter the tourney as a 10 seed, if lucky maybe a 9. A loss in MAC tourney puts them in the NIT. An at-large seems like a huge stretch at this point and honestly shouldn't be our focus anyways. The MAC has been a 1 bid conference for the past 16 years and any team banking on that changing this year was likely going to end up disappointed.
-
This game was lost by the fact NIU managed to get an 15 extra shot attempts and 5 extra free throw attempts. NIU managed to both dominate the glass (+7 boards) and did a much better job of not turning the ball over (6 fewer turnovers).
Akron shot well and held NIU to a meager 42% fg%. Akron just can't afford to concede 15 offensive rebounds.
-
Let's not knock the guy for sitting behind Zeke and Hyde. In Warren Ball's 3 non redshirt years those 2 guys amassed nearly 5500 combined rushing yards and both will regularly be seeing the field next NFL season.
I'm not predicting him getting 1,500+ yards, but I feel he has the opportunity to do really well here.
-
So it has been a few years since I made it out to the JAR. How early would you guys estimate that I would need to get to the game in order to guarantee myself a bobble head?
-
6 minutes ago, ZippyRulz said:
+1. We need the exposure. Too bad Kent will be getting it also.
Well hopefully Akron massacres them so people will see how bad Ken+ sucks.
-
I've tried calling twice today and both times I got a recording that said something along the lines of I'm contacting them outside business hours and I need to call back during business hours of Monday-Friday 9am-5pm. Unless I'm missing something it's Friday 10:08 AM. Oh well, I made an effort. I suppose they don't want my money.
-
Akron's RPI climbed to 40.
http://espn.go.com/mens-college-basketball/rpi/_/sort/RPI
Kenpom has them at 63
Lunardi has them as a 13th seed.
-
1
-
-
I was going to see about getting a 3 game pack for the Ken+, Buffalo, and OU game, but I went to gozips.com/tickets like it states and that package was no where to be found.
-
Nice seeing the Zips get some love. Getting a game on ESPN2 is pretty big news.
-
10 minutes ago, tpsjugglerdude said:
This is another year we are missing the Bracket Buster which would be huge right now.
The same weekend that Akron played Iona and UCSB in Vegas, Ken+ played in a Vegas tournament that featured SMU, Colorado, and Penn St. IDK if Akron had an opportunity to compete in this instead of Ken+, I'm guessing no, but getting into more of these type of tournaments is what Akron should aim for in the future. These are opportunities to make statement wins on neutral courts. Your aren't going to see teams like SMU or Colorado come to the JAR so playing some place where the stakes are about even is the next best thing.
-
14 minutes ago, Dr Z said:
Have the Zips ever averaged 11.5 or more three pointers made per game as far back as you can remember?
The Zips are having their best year from the 3-pt line and makes and attempts across the NCAAM have been trending upwards. All I'm saying is NCAAM teams relying heavily on 3-pt shots for offense isn't some new phenomena.
-
3-pt shooting has been a huge part of college basketball as far back as I can remember. Granted I'm only 26. It definitely beat the NBA to the party in that regard. The shorter distance and the fact a lot of smaller schools rely on it as an equalizer when facing larger schools has a lot to do with that.
I'm still surprised to see that a player has taken 195 shots on the season and all 195 were 3-pointers.
-
3 minutes ago, MDZip said:
What are you talking about? Both CMU and Toledo both have a win over a top 50 team. ;-)
"Does the MAC as an entire conference even have a win over an RPI top 50 team in OOC play this year?"
I specified in OOC play.
-
1 hour ago, GJGood said:
I would like to see the MAC get two teams in again sometime in the near future. I just don't want it to be this year because that means the Zips didn't win the conference tourney. The MAC needs a year where two, or possibly three, teams clearly distinguish themselves as well above the rest of the conference. I always find it ironic that when a P5 conference has a bunch of teams close together in the standings the "experts" say its because of how strong the teams in the league are and that they are all deserving but when it happens in the MAC it is because no one was good enough to distinguish themselves. It is a double standard.
I don't see the double standard. Those P5 conference schools played and beat really good teams in other conferences. Does the MAC as an entire conference even have a win over an RPI top 50 team in OOC play this year?
Schools like Butler and Gonzaga made a name for themselves despite playing in small conferences by proving that they could hang with and beat other power schools. Every few years the MAC will have a team put together a decent postseason run, but most years they are 1 and done in both March Madness and the NIT. If the MAC starts winning marque OOC games and they perform better in post season play, the selection committee will take notice.
Edit: Looking back I see Ball State has a win over Valparaiso whose RPI is at exactly #50. That is 1 marque win for a conference that has 12 teams. That isn't good.
-
3
-
-
19 minutes ago, Dr Z said:
16 three pointers!!! Congratulations to those that answered correctly before the game started.
Oklahoma shooting that volume of 3s and still hitting 45.8% of them for the season. That's impressive.
-
Akron put on a shooting clinic tonight. 16 made 3s and 49% shooting from the field, 50% from behind the arc.
9100 Attendance
in Akron Zips Football
Posted
Those are all fair points. I suppose my judgment was clouded by me skimming thru the parts that sounded like a broken record and just reading the parts that I cared about. Have you looked into submitting a letter to the editor in hopes that it would get published? I'd be interested in reading that piece.