kreed5120

https://tenor.com/view/woody-harrelson-crying-money-wipe-tears-rich-gif-16201471 Edit: Only a serious note, Nate was an outstanding player but any team desperate enough to give him $1.6 million or give Okonkwo any sizable sum probably wasn't going to go far regardless.

I don't really want to spend too much time looking ahead to next season, but my hope is that they're able to bring someone else in. Marvin doesn't have the size to play ~25 minutes a game. Barre, who I don't know if he even has remaining eligibility, is too much of a health risk. If Briscoe can't even get minutes with Barre injured I don't see him being a key contributor. I honestly wouldn't be surprised if he transfers at the end of the season

I would agree the defense has improved since after the Murray State game. There were some breakdowns defensively against Ball State, but for the most part they were hitting contested shots. Many of those being mid-rangers or 3s with a hand in their face.

There were some objectively terrible Akron teams prior to Dambrot coming to Akron. That was before my time though. I would imagine the defense was worse on some of those single digit win teams. I do think it's lazy to just look at points allowed as the sole measure of a defense. Like your mentioned pace can inflate the numbers. I still think outside of Groce's 1st season this is probably his worst defensive team. Like you, I don't necessarily think it's all effort. They just often try to trap and then are slow in rotating. Not having a rim protector certainly plays a part, but I feel that would be something we could overcome if we boxed out better and defended the 3-point line better.

I don't know if it's factual or not, but it feels like there are much fewer charges called than previous years. Not just in Akron games either.

We've struggled all season in securing defensive rebounds. Way too many 2nd chance points.

Elmer hits a 3 off an offensive rebound at the buzzer to send this to OT.

It has me scratching my head as well.

I'm not thrilled or disappointed by the signing. He could be good, but couldn't display it as he was burried behind 2 great collegiate QBs. It's also possible that he isn't cut out for FBS football. Not really much tape to go off of. One would think he would have seen the field more in mop up duty, but looking at it Miami and North Texas pretty much played their starting QBs for nearly every snap.

I don't see it mentioned here, but apparently new rule was passed upping the number of games allowed to be played for a redshirt from 4 to 9. https://www.espn.com/college-football/story/_/id/47601492/fbs-coaches-vote-unanimously-adjust-sport-redshirt-rule

It was the suspicious betting trends that did him in. Not the fact that he threw a ball or strike. The handle on micro betting is very small so if the typical handle is let's say $1k-2k on any particular pitch and over the course of a season a pitcher or batter has $200k bet placed on them 5-10 times then that will just stick out. If it happened just once then nobody would have probably noticed, but the trend repeated itself. That's why spreads are more commonly bet on. Those are more likely to go under the radar as a $100k bet on something that typically sees $2M-$3M in action isn't going to stand out as much as a $100K bet on something people rarely bet on. Still people get greedy and there are lots of mouths to get fed in match fixing. A $5k on that Kent - Buffalo game probably goes unnoticed. A $400k+ is a ton to bet on a MACtion game. A UNC-Duke game probably not so much.

Well yes, something like boxing would be easier. I was more thinking team sports when I said it.

Basketball is just the easiest sport to fix since there are only 5 players playing at a time and players play both offense and defense. I will say thankfully Ohio banned prop bets for collegiate athletes. If it was still active this would likely even be a bigger problem.

I was referring to NET and other advanced stats the committee uses, not the AP poll. A number of years ago a ranked team, I think it was St. Mary's, was left out of March Madness despite being ranked in the polls. Being ranked isn't a guarantee to making the field.

There really isn't a test case to say definitively how the committee would handle the situation. Based off their computer numbers and lack of Q1 and Q2 wins it would be a no. At the same time I think it would be hard for them to exclude a team with 1 loss, presuming to a top ~50 Akron.

I saw it mentioned that the EMU player is in trouble for games last season when he played for New Orleans. Not for any games this year at EMU. That would likely mean it was the Buffalo player, whoever that is.

Reading it again I can see how that could be the case.

By and large I agree with you. I do think it does setup for some decent David vs Goliath moments. Like I know Indiana is spending some money now, but nothing in comparison to a OSU or Texas A&M.

Buffalo was mentioned as well so 1/3 of the schools that played MAC basketball last season. That must explain why the conference was so down /s. Edit: More now that I think about it EMU if I recall was being investigated before. Maybe another school as well.

I mean Simpson just left school 1 year early to go pro and will likely make $20+ million because of it. Nate didn't have that option. The reality is both left for money. One for the pros and another to a different school.

Iona lost to Rider, which entered the night at 1-14. I'm not sure if Iona is battling injuries or what, but they have been nosediving the past couple of weeks.

They were also projected to finish 7th in the MAC preseason rankings so it's not like they were all that hyped in the first place. When it's all said and done I expect them to have a top 4-5 seed.

The big difference here is that Simpson is going to get life changing money. If he's picked around the middle of the first round he'll come away with $20 million guaranteed. If he slides into the top 10 that number could climb closer to $30 million. For that reason I don't find the situation all that comparable.

I'm not questioning they are favorites in any particular game, but odds are they still lose at least 1 game. No MAC team has gone undefeated in conference play since 1958, which was ironically Miami who went 12-0. In that time between then and now we've seen some terrific teams Wally Miami, Kent State Elite 8, Buffalo a few years back to name a few. They all had at least 1 loss and frankly they would all be heavy favorites over this years Miami team. If the MAC was as bad as it was last year I would think the possibility would be greater, but this year there are plenty of MAC teams capable of sneaking up on you. EMU beat Cincy, BG knocked off Kansas State, UMass beat 2 P4, and even Ohio knocked off a fairly good St. Bonaventure. Edit: I want to be clear my comment wasn't meant to be a knock to Miami. I feel their start is better than many are giving them credit for. I understand their SOS is very weak, but it's more challenging to consistently win games you're expected to than what people give it credit for. Look at Akron as a prime example. 3 out of our 4 losses we entered into the game as the Vegas favorite, but lost.

It seemed after the 8 min timeout we just quit running offense. Just walked downed the court, dribble a bit, and then toss up a 3 (not even good look ones). I'm not sure if we just took our foot off the gas too early or what.