RoyalBlu

Proenza had a vision but absolutely no financial acumen to pull off any of his ideas that didn't go into the red.

I would say Groce and Ohio picked Miami.

I get your point but with one disclaimer ... Kent (or Akron or any other MAC team) is not 'gaming' the system by playing a tougher schedule. That's what we all want to see. The residue of that - regardless of how good/bad any MAC team is - is a boost in the metrics. I agree by on the court matchups and the 'eye' test Miami was last year and probably this year a better MAC team than Kent. I agree Kent is often a eyesore to watch offensively, no matter what year it is. But they usually hang their hat on the other end of the court. That's them, not most teams in the MAC, and they have to live and die by that. But the simple fact is, particularly late in the season (Akron aside) most teams just don't like to play them because of their style ... not because they can't beat them. That's their 'edge.' You got to be a team like Akron - more offense, comparable defense - to consistently take them out. Or a team like Miami that has so much offense it overcomes their defense/physicality. The way Akron and Miami play is much more pleasing to the eye and entertaining. They effectively play mostly 6-2 baseball games and win, but can win 3-2 as well. As I watch Kent over the years, they play almost all 3-2, 2-1 games with winning or losing hanging on a bad pitch, giving up a home run, or getting a strike-out in the ninth. To win games like that, IMO, you have to play a tough schedule. For the most part, that's what Akron does and that's what Kent does. There is value in that. Miami, since the late Charlie Coles, has not done that and nationally, it has cost them.

Went through this last season ... Miami vs. Kent hed-to-hed , Miami is/was better. However, Kent vs. the Field is/was better than Miami by 2024-25 metrics, and justified by NIT run. Could Miami have done the same? I would guess so. But the fact Kent did it on the court says ... while the metrics may have been wrong about Miami, they were NOT wrong about Kent. I don't have to like it, to recognize it. Such is life as a mid-major. One-bid league. Would I pick Kent over Miami in the MAC this year? Not based on what I saw last season, or based on what each team has coming back. But if it comes down to SOS again for the NIT, and the overall W/L records are much the same as 24-25, I would not be surprised if Kent got the nod again. Miami's non-con schedule (like last season) is woefully weak.

While your point is well taken and accurate ... Findlay has fared well over the years vs. D1 competition in exhibitions.

Fair enough ... I'll leave it be.

Sorry, still confused??? Oats (2018, 2019) and Boals (2021) are the only MAC coaches to win NCAA Tournament games since Groce (2012). Heath was a decade even before that. Am I missing something?

How did his name get into the conversation?????

I would say Boals and Oats (Buffalo) are the only coaches with any NCAA/March success for the MAC in the last 10 years while Groce has not won a March/NCAA game since 2013 (Illinois). Such is life in the MAC. Martin likely slots in the top third of the league, going into his first MAC season with a clear chance to climb a notch or two higher, pending initial MAC success. Until a MAC coach starts winning NCAA Tournament games, or even having consistent NIT success, I say there is no real clear No. 1 .... although we do have our favorites. Toledo's MAC titles (regular season) and Akron's titles (MAC Tournament) are great 'MAC' achievements. Until the MAC gets another true powerhouse program that steps up in March ... we (MAC) are who they say we are.

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.

As I understand it ... pairings are supposed to be based on projected NET rankings for the coming year. If that's true, then the schedule-makers expect one team to get a lot better and another to get a lot worse. As for 'name' recognition, I don't believe that figures into the NET rankings. While I certainly hope JMU ranks as a Net 125 team or better by the end of the season, not sure I'd bet on it. I will bet the Zips being NET 125 or better. These folks better figure out how this game is being played; it's based on NET, not name. Just look down the road. Kent lucked into a NIT bid based on NET, over a MAC team that beat them three times and finished ahead of them in the standings. In a 1-bid league like the MAC, the NET still matters.