skip-zip

Yes, I know. That's great. If you're actually IN the tournament. But since you appear to be really high on the "more reliable" MAC Auto Bid, do you really think it matters to our coaches and players if we're a 13 or 14 (our usual spot) because odds say we have a 3% better chance of winning? Or, do you think the matchup is more important? Ok, I just got us back to what we were debating an hour ago

I made a post in another thread about our win totals, and the likelihood that we get into the tournament with each one. We're probably pretty close to the same thought on this. I think 28 or more HAS to be the target number as well. Part of your post above focuses on something I preach all the time. We have to start beating teams that matter if we are going to elevate our program. Just winning some of those games. Period. And that doesn't mean waiting for an occasional NCAA appearance. You might see 4 tournament appearances as an "auto bid" in 37 years as some sort of positive. But trust me, if you've lived through all the other 33 failures to get those auto bids in conference tournaments, going all the way back to 1980, you'd understand.

That would be great if all we had to discuss every year was where they were going to place us. Or if we could "just win in Cleveland", as if that's always the simple solution because it's happened 3 times in the 25 years that we've played in the MAC ? Unfortunately, when you've only made 4 brief appearances in the 37 years that you've been eligible as a D-I member, just finding a way to get in becomes quite a bit more important. Take this year, for example. Lets say we'd end up somewhere between a 10 and 14 seed, based on the likely range of our final record. Does any of those positions make us any more likely to succeed in the tournament if we don't know the matchup ? There's a logical reason why all the focus of discussion is on just getting IN. But yes, that would surely be my dream to sit here on January 26th of every season and be talking about seeding.

You are right. I can't say that his shot selection has gotten better either. He's just become a better shooter. And I didn't see it coming. Several people I know talk about his dedication, and all the time he puts into improving him game. It's really paying off. It's been quite a pleasant surprise, and has a lot to do with our success this year.

Thanks Kreed. I was thinking that those two girls were really the only possibilities. She's a pretty girl. I can't believe I don't remember her. But, I gather from the story that she wasn't here very long?

Then that's my opinion, and I'm stickin to it

I found this today. I'm quite certain that she's the one on the far left, first row. I still don't remember her. And I don't want to sound mean, but am I the only one who who thinks that our cheerleaders in general used to be a lot more attractive?

Here's how I think right now when I look at the potential win total. 27 wins - Slim Chance 28 wins - Maybe 29 wins - Should 30 wins - IN

I'm optimistic that this team CAN win the rest of their games. Heck, who would have guessed before the season started that we'd already be dominating every team in the league by this margin on January 25th? With that said, these are college kids. They won't play like you want them to play every game. We'll have our struggles. The question will be: Can we have struggles and still not lose those games? We can certainly say that it's happened already. The odds will certainly say that we'll lose games yet this season. But our opponents still have to play those games. And they have to beat us. And I like being in our position. Let me add this: A couple of years ago, Gonzaga won 17 straight conference games before suffering their first loss. If we are as dominant in our own conference, why can't we do the same?

And it looks like that is right. I had been thinking something else. But, I just went back and counted, and it looks like we only won 22 straight between the loss to Nevada at home right before Christmas in 2006, and the loss at home to NIU the following season.

It says in the story that our 27 game home win streak broke a record from the Huggins era. I'm almost certain that it broke the streak of 26 that ended in the 2008 season with a loss to NIU.

Agree 100%. At times, I feel like they are progressing defensively. For instance, last night WMUs shooting percentage was kept low. But this team needs to find ways to get some steals and increase the turnovers. That's sound advice !!

I don't think any of what you saw late in the 2nd half last night had anything to do with our coach wanting to "take our foot off the gas". Ivey was playing sick. Big Dog got long periods of rest. That will all help us in the long run. But, we didn't even get down the rotation far enough for Tavian or Aaron to get more that a few minutes. We were playing a 40 minute game with the majority of our key guys. I think some people underestimate what can happen late in a comfortable-margin game when one team is trying to score at full-throttle, and the other doesn't want to commit a foul. Other than a few moments when WMU cut that lead down to about 8 or so, we had things well under control. But sure, I wanted a 20 point win as much as anyone else.

I'm grateful for Poke's contributions and development time while we've been waiting.

Does anyone else see the resemblance?

Hughes looked like he was in the lineup for layup drills when they came out of halftime. If that's the case, it would seem that he's close to playing again. I don't like the way we rebounded tonight, and I think we let them score 46 points in the 2nd half? But, Western is big on the perimeter and very tough to defend with our personnel. Luckily, their lack of quickness defensively to cover the floor with those kinds of players is their downfall. All MAC road wins are nice. Keep the train rolling !!

Sure. We were out of sync those last few minutes without him on the floor.

That's assuming that these people are all studying exactly what Akron is doing, and who they are playing. Do you really think the majority of these pollsters are doing that?. It's a bunch of people following a brief trend in popularity. Akron keeps winning, and a few more people think it's cool to vote for Akron, then a few more, then a few more.

Right. We all know the drawbacks to playing in the MAC. But as MDZip showed earlier, our number of votes in both polls grew pretty substantially during the 2013 winning streak, from week to week. So, the fact that we didn't get any more votes after two more wins should be surprising in comparison. The RPI number is good for us for mid-January. That's not a concern to me at all. We only got to #34 by the end of last season, so we still have a lot of time left to climb higher.

Great find. I don't recall her, but I love that she's wearing an Akron tee shirt in one of her on-line photos. Thanks for remembering your alma mater as you become famous !!

I don't recall if we appeared first in the Coaches Poll or the AP Poll in 2013. We only know that we ultimately climbed higher in the Coaches Poll. But we did have plenty of votes in both polls. I wonder if MDZip would be kind enough to also compile the same history of our climb in the 2013 AP Poll as he just did for the 2013 Coaches Poll?

Believing that 2007 tells us what we need to know would mean that you'd be ignoring 2008. The very next year, Kent got a #9 seed in the Big Dance with 28 wins. So, that would have put them in front of somewhere between 8 and 12 other At Large teams that got in, which indicates that they made the tournament rather easily. That seed also indicated that the committee believed that they were one of the best 36 teams in the entire field.

That might be how it happened. No joke. We probably know their people pretty well after playing them in basketball 10 times, and we were looking for a date to fill, and there you go. I think this will be the first time ever that I will do what I have wanted to do for a long time. I am going to show up for kickoff, watch us go up about 14-0, and then spend the rest of the day in the parking lot having some fun.

Hmm. So, we're making an appearance much sooner than we did in 2013, but obviously have a long way to go.