RoyalBlu

They may not have been 30-point dogs ... but a lot of them were 30-point losers just the same. A ton of non-competitive games.

It looks like the bulk of Miami's team is returning, plus a strong recruiting class. Combined with the Zips returning its entire roster, plus the addition of UMass next season, the MAC should be very strong at the top, at least. Toledo (so far) is the only top tier program with significant losses. Ohio has had a couple and Kent is still to be determined. Still, having three strong teams of proven winners/veterans is something not many mid-major conferences can point to going into next season. Yes, I know UMass is coming off a losing season. But overall, that is a proven A-10 conference program. Would be shocked if they did not come in as a Top 4 team in the league, at the least. If all MAC teams schedule to their pedigree, the league should be much improved. Likely still one NCAA bid, but multiple NIT bids and a clear indication the league is moving up, not down. Let's hope.

THE NEXT STEP ... has been there for half the MAC over the last 20 years. For the most part, THE NEXT STEP has ultimately been backward. Ball State, Miami, Ohio, Buffalo, and arguably even Toledo have all been poised for THE NEXT STEP but just haven't taken it. As for Akron and Kent, both programs are just sitting on the fence, IMO, capable of falling on either side. Why? Because it takes a serious longterm commitment by the administration to invest in the on-court program, facilities, coaching salaries, advertising, scheduling not to mention NIL. It shouldn't take 15 years to get a practice facility, much less upgrade the arena. It shouldn't take another MAC team to pay its coach a top tier salary, to get you to respond in kind. It should be part of both the athletic budget and the university budget to advertise/promote the team. And so on. Akron and Kent are on the fence, capable of falling into a hole on one side with the loss of a coach or falling 'up' with the right administrative investments. Saying, 'the same for football' is BS, unless the team has reached the point it's a consistent 7/8-game winner-bowl participant/and winner, and regularly sending picks to the NFL Draft. And that's not happening anywhere in the MAC, with the exception of Toledo. For marketing purposes, Ball State, Miami, Ohio Buffalo, Akron, Kent all need to look in the mirror and admit a little more $$$ into men's basketball will go a lot farther than a little more $$$ in football. By a long shot. Until MAC administrations face that fact, (Fill in the school name) will always be a big fish in a small pond. But what's happening now is, mid-majors are no longer big fish in small ponds, but flopping fish searching for air in a fast-sinking pool of water. Head for the lake and swim, instead of gasping for air.

The 'They won't Play us' argument is old and outdated. Teams can find those. games if they want them. Just commit to playing on the road. Coming off a 30-pt NCAA Tournament loss, make that November game a 20-pt loss. Then make the next NCAA Tournament game a 10-pt game where the pressure now shifts to the higher seed to win down the stretch. At worse you look like Bobby-MO vs. Alabama. At best, you get the upset.

I still say, when it comes to scheduling, the entire MAC - not just Akron - would be well served tieing in a basketball game along with these payday football games all these teams schedule for money. Yes, they will be on the road. But knowing what an Arizona State, Oklahoma or Alabama looks like up close should take some of the angst off facing one of those type teams in the NCAA Tournament. If just the Top Tier MAC BB teams consistently played an Akron-type schedule from this past season, PLUS 2-3 power conference teams instead of D-2s and SWAC teams, it would go a long way for both the Zips and the league.

Groce is right. Akron's schedule was 'competitive.' The two Sun Belt games, Milwaukee, Yale are the 'competitive' non-conference games Akron should be playing. Akron's non-con SOS was second-best in the MAC per Kenpom. However, the Zips never played a game above their class. That is the measure, especially going forward. Being 'Best in (Mid-Major/MAC) Class' is great in and of itself. But the object is to step up, in non-conference. Can't wait until the NCAA to see how you measure up. Those recently successful Buffalo MAC teams 'played up' often in the non-conference. That is where Akron has to step up, especially if the bulk of this still young team returns for 2025-2026. If that means a 25-win season instead of 28, that is worth it.

I believe both things can be true; It was a special team ... that dominated in a down MAC season. While I think this was Groce's deepest team, with Harris, I would not call this his best team. And as several posters have pointed out, this team would have struggled against a couple of other Akron teams from the last 20 years. That said .. one woulld think this team could be much much better next season w/Harris and a couple of more bigs, especially if Johnson & Johnson return as well.

Doubt the MAC will be as easy to win next season as this season. Miami has been hit in the mouth and tasted blood. They will be a tough out. UMass is an unknown but expected to be Top 6 in the league at worst, and a contender at best. Toledo will likely regroup and return to its profile as a 3-pt shooting team. Ohio and Kent, who knows but historically Top 6 as well. After that, a wild card (much like Miami this season) could get in the mix as well. If Akron, Miami, Ohio, UMass are not overly hit with transfers, and schedule to their pedigree, the MAC should see the conference rank improve, perhaps markedly. All that said, the Zips should be No. 1 going into next season considering all the returnees and high level recruits. Another solid big, plus the return of Harris and the Zips are definitely both improved and experienced. The rest of the MAC still has to catch up to Akron.

Why does the MAC/Akron always draw these West Coast teams in the NCAA Tournament.

Yes ... (Those that accepted the offer) in decending order. Kent was 128 Miami was 147 Several teams in between them were selected. Many teams above Kent declined the NIT ... or opted to play in another tournament.

Did you read this in the press release .... The top teams from each conference will be determined based on the average of the teams’ ESPN Basketball Power Index (BPI), Kevin Pauga Index (KPI), NCAA Evaluation Tool (NET), Ken Pomeroy Rating (KenPom), Strength of Record (SOR), Torvik ranking and Wins Above Bubble (WAB) ranking. All rankings are already included in the “Team Sheets” used by the NIT Committee during the selection process. All teams receiving an exempt bid are guaranteed the opportunity to host a first-round game. In addition to the exempt teams, regular-season conference champions that are not otherwise selected to the NCAA championship can earn an automatic bid to the NIT as long as that regular-season champion has an average of 125 or better across the BPI, KPI, NET, KenPom, SOR, Torvik and WAB rankings. The rest of the 32-team field will be selected as at-large teams by the NIT Committee. It is understood, by most, that the at-large teams will be held to the same criteria as the exempt teams. When other teams back out, the metric average of 125 then became 126, 127, 128 and so on. Kent State was 128. I believe Miami was 147. As for the MM T-25. Speaking for myself, I'm saying these are the kind of teams you want to see more of on all MAC schedules. Akron played St. Mary's, Yale, Milwaukee and Arkansas State off the list, (and South Alabama was likely on the list when the Zips played them) plus 5 games vs. Kent and Miami. The rest of the MAC should do the same. BTW, Akron played Ark. St. as part of the Sun Belt Challenge based on Kenpom comparison. Kent played Ar. St. based on the same thing. One was on the road, one was at home.

It's not a matter of 'standing up for Kent.' It's a MAC thread, first off. And has been pointed out many times before, scheduling is huge for mid-majors, and in this case it paid off for Kent. Auburn-Alabama, Michigan-Indiana aside, check out the Mid-Major Top 25. It gives a solid clue to why Kent over Miami. You will see that Akron and Kent, by a wide margin, played more teams on that list (including others getting votes) than anyone else in the MAC did, including Miami. I doubt Kent went into the season - or even ended the season - thinking they were going to be a NIT team. But the 'lucky' reward was a NIT bid because of their scheduling. It validates what many have complained about MAC Basketball for years. Most MAC teams don't play anybody. It's not just getting a few P5s on the schedule, it's playing 5-6 other teams like yourself. You will likely lose your share. But if you win enough (Akron-Miami aside, Kent was 3-1 vs. other MM T-25+ teams) you could potentially get a reward. BTW - Miami and Kent aside, Akron was 1-3 vs. other MM T25+teams. Other than Akron-Kent, Miami did not play another team on the MM T-25+. Not always about wins and loses. But playing quality games. https://collegeinsider.com/mens-mid-major-top-25

NCAA BB Scholarship limit goes up to 15 next season.

I think what most folks are missing is the fact Kent was rewarded for having a solid non-conference schedule. Yes, they lost to Auburn, Alabama and Cal-Irvine, -- Akron and Miami a total of 5 times, too -- but also won their share of games as well. Look at the Mid-Major Top 25, and you will see Akron and Kent played a fair share of games vs. teams in the T-25 and others getting votes. The rest of the MAC should take scheduling note.

I believe it's spring break ...

Just to be fair ... there were at least three teams, including Wichita State, ranked below Kent and above Miami that got into the NIT ahead of Miami. If the MAC was guaranteed a bid from the outset, then Miami should have been the pick as No. 2 in the MAC. But only top 15 conferences were guaranteed a bid. After that, it was all metrics. I say, if you beat a team 3 times, and still don't rank above them in the metrics then (1) something is wrong with the rest of your metrics and (2) you are just a bad matchup. That's a MAC issue, not a NIT issue. Miami still ranked 20 spots lower, Kenpom, not just one or two, or they probably would have been picked, along with Kent. Something in that Miami resume didn't add up. On the court, in the MAC, no question Miami was the better team. But on paper, it was Kent. Not saying it's right. Just sayin ...

Folks forget a lot of these 'flareups' are just one continued battle ... the infamous Singletary/Linhart punch actually goes back to the previous year, MAC Tournament, final moments late in the game when a hard (very legal) Linhart boxout at the FT line caused Singletary to fall hard and hit his head. Kent immediately took Singletary out of the game. Don't know what happened first Kent/Akron game that next season, but the second game was 'the punch'

I'm no math major ... so the pluses and minuses for all these different rankings is above my head. I grew up with the RPI and Sagarin. One would guess that, over time, other measurements would evolve. Not saying one is better than another. Just saying it's still out there for those who wish to check it out and compare.

FWIW, heard a different story. Morales caught an elbow in practice some time after first Akron game. Broken orbital bone. Has since signed (per twitter) with an international team. Also note, since that first Akron game those guys have been playing much better, ... for them. Whichever story is right, was a net positive for them.

What's interesting about this is ... the original standard, the RPI ... is not part of the equation. Indeed, it is mostly forgotten. But it still lives and offers some interesting insights. First, the MAC is not as bad here as everywhere else with a Conference RPI of 16. Second, three MAC teams are ranked 101 or higher (Akron, 45) Third, with a Top 50 RPI the Zips could be considered a NCAA bubble team, although there are no quality (Top 100) wins to support this. That said, going 17-1 in the MAC should carry some weight in and of itself. That 2002 Kent team went 17-1 and had no quality non-con wins to speak of, either. Although, Ball State, Marshall, BG and Miami were all highly regarded 2002 MAC teams -- unlike the rank and file this season. http://realtimerpi.com/rpi_conf_Men.html

Zips should be a sure thing in my book opening round ... the other three games all have some level of upset potential. Beware of Western ... they beat Kent, Eastern and Miami during the regular season.

THIS IS A ROAD GAME ...

If you look around the MAC, pretty much nobody is making even an average (33.3%) about of 3-points as a team, game in and game out. Miami seems decent, but that's about it. Volume shooting is good, I guess, if that's your game. But you have to live and die by it. The fact there are so few even decent post players in the league anymore ... even the 6-7 types ... means every MAC team is pretty much about the same. You'll look good on a good shooting night, and look awful on a bad shooting night.

Thanks for the website link ... Noticed in the 12-team league 8 teams are trending down. Only two teams trending up are Ball State and Eastern Michigan. Interesting. Also noted all top 4 teams in the MAC are loaded with Q4 wins. Doesn't say much for the league. CMU has 2 Q2 wins, both non-con. Ball State has 1 vs. Kent.

That's just it ... statistics say they may be the worst team in the MAC (outside of NIU).