RoyalBlu

Personally, have no clue. But since the recruit is a PG perhaps Medley is the guy. Have to look at their roster to see who really is a PG now.. Sullinger and Bekelp (?) both graduated. Maybe it's the freshman G. from St. Ignatius. Again, don't really know.

Like most recruits, I would take that 6-3 with a grain of salt. As for need, there are rumblings on their board they have had some backcourt injuries that could be season-ending. They may just need bodies. As for eligibility, ask Ali Ali.

Don't know if Kent will be there for the long haul -- too many freshmen and backcourt is suspect -- but they will be a tough out by the end of the season, no matter what. They really haven't spent much on transfers, although they have a few. Seems they have put more resources into freshmen, a couple with some A-10 type pedigree. The trick will be keeping them - if they are as good as recruitniks say. I think UMass is the team to watch. More size than any MAC team, which may offset the 3-point shooting from Akron and Miami. Anxious to see what they really look like. Also, while not a contender, hearing a lot of really good things about Central Michigan as a team to keep an eye on. After that, the usual suspects.

Let's get this season started with thoughts of what's known, and what's to come. That 24-25 Post Mortem is hopefully done.

I didn't see the scrimmage ... but I stand by what I said a few posts back. For those who were there, how did the big guys play. Talent wise Akron's guards/wings should match up well against anyone in the league. Won't need a true big in the MAC to win it ... but after Lyles, how did the other bigs look?

If the stars align, I believe both Akron and Miami have teams capable of meeting/eclipsing the 2002 run by Kent State. That's how bullish I am on this BB season. Injuries have to be avoided, inevitable 'bad' games have to be overcome and so forth. But based on roster talent and returning experience both teams are loaded. Even a poor start out of the gate - remember Kent was 4-4 before they figured it out - can be overcome by either team. The sad part is, 2002 was the year the NCAA pimped the MAC, big time, and hasn't looked back. Bowling Green, had at least one power conference win and I believe, lost just nine games, and 3 of those were to Kent. Ball State that year had a huge non-conference with at least two and maybe 3 P5 wins. Marshall was loaded as well. It's assumed Kent would not have been an at-large w/o winning the 2002 MAC Tournament. That will likely be the case for Akron and/or Miami. Sad.

I believe two PGs can play together with no problem.

Can't disagree with this. MAC schedule is extremely favorable. Only playing Ohio, Miami, Umass, Toledo once each is rare. Really can't see any team Zips play twice as troublesome. Even allowing for the annual MAC hiccup, somewhere, still just don't see many high hurdles at all.

I'm not so sure, at this point, he's the No. 2 coach in the MAC behind Gross. Probably, yes. But let's give the guy a year in the MAC to solidify that statement. Boals, Steele, Kowalczk, Senderoff can all make solid arguments for No. 2 at this point, IMO. I agree Martin's pedigree speaks loudly. But winning in the MAC is no joke, no matter where the MAC ranks nationally. Until Martin runs that gauntlet successfully - and goes deep in the MAC Tournament - I'd say he's even with the four guys above. That would make him No. 2, or maybe No. 6. We'll see.

Or put it another way ... 1 game only vs. Toledo, UMass, Ohio, Miami and NIU. Zips should easily dispatch Toledo, Ohio and NIU. UMass is an unknown no matter home or away. Miami on the road is the only real ???, and Zips play them before students return for the semester. Tough to argue with this MAC schedule, no matter how you look at it.

Swap out St. Bonnie with Cincinnati. Better still How about OSU-Cincy-Dayton/Xavier-MAC on a rotating basis. I'm guessing 'A' Ohio state university would not want to be in a pool with other Ohio universities ... unless the game is played in C-bus. So many state universities in Ohio to choose from, ... but I'm sure you know who I mean.

I'm guessing the shooting has improved ... not sure yet if the team improved, particularly on defense. Time will tell.

I have no clue who it is ... but since he's a big ... guessing he will replace a big???

Groce has signed several players from USA-Africa, I believe. They just haven't stuck for long. As far as basketball, those guys seem to be pretty transient - quick to transfer if they show any definite skill (blocked shots, rebounding) scoring usually comes late to most of them as well, if at all. Frankly, most would be better served staying and improving at the mid-major level but I'm guessing handlers and agents are pushing for bigger bucks as fast as possible.

Let me add this: I believe many would agree the NIT should take the best team from each conference. As I understand it, by the rules stated before last season, they decided to take the best team FROM EACH OF THE TOP 15 CONFERENCES, then the best at-large teams based on NET. MY guess is they did it this way because so many P5 teams were opting not to play in the NIT. By using the NET, it opened the door for more mid-major teams if they finished in the top NET 125 and did not make the NCAA Tournament. Since the MAC was not a Top 15 NET conference last season, the selection came down strictly to NET, not MAC. Not saying that was fair. Just saying that was the rules. Unless the NIT changes its process this season, the MAC can do two things. 1) Become a Top 15 NET conference. That way the likely hood is the MAC would get not 1 NIT team, but quite likely 2. 2) Have as many teams as possible finish NET 125 or better. And the way to achieve No. 2 is play (and win) as many games as possible vs. NET 150 teams or better. FYI -- Since the 2025 NIT Final Four ended up being all mid-majors; North Texas, UC Irvine, Loyola-Chicago and UT-Chattanooga -- if would not surprise me if the NIT changed their selection process again.