Sorry to open a wound...

[xu9697]

4 seeds= Wisconsin, Vanderbilt, Purdue & Maryland.

OU got a 14 seed, but I do believe Akron would have garnered a 13.

I see all those teams as beatable for the Zips. DAMMIT!!!

Funny thing is, had we got a 12, I like those match-ups less.

5 seeds= Texas A&M, Michigan State, Temple and Butler.

OK, we could have exacted some reveng on Tex A&M, but Temple is damn tough this year, Butler has played and beaten some seriously good teams and MSU is a team with Izzo that could find it again in the tourney and go on a run.

[GP1]

4 seeds= Wisconsin, Vanderbilt, Purdue & Maryland.

I see all those teams as beatable for the Zips. DAMMIT!!!

Sorry for the Monday morning reality check, but the Zips couldn't beat any of these teams on their best day.

All of these teams are near the top of their respective conferences. I saw Vandy take apart South Carolina in Columbia this year and they would destroy the Zips. Maryland finished near the top of a real conference as did Wisconsin and Purdue. UofA finished second in the worst conference in the country and was destroyed twice by the regular season champion. The Zips lost to a bad OU team in the MAC Championship. There is no way they beat either of these teams.

Next year, I need everyone to do me a favor. I asked a similar favor after football season when I asked everyone to stop posting as if it is the 1950s and it has taken a little. Next year, I need everyone to go to a top level conference game somewhere driveable from NE Ohio...meaning the Big East or Big Ten. Go with an open mind and really think about the Zips position and college basketball and ask whether or not they could really be even competitive in one of those leagues. If you come to the conclusion the Zips fall short, it doesn't make you a bad fan.

I go to both ACC and SEC games here in the south and I can no longer convince myself what I watch at a MAC basketball game is even similar.

[meatwad]

4 seeds= Wisconsin, Vanderbilt, Purdue & Maryland.

I see all those teams as beatable for the Zips. DAMMIT!!!

Sorry for the Monday morning reality check, but the Zips couldn't beat any of these teams on their best day.

All of these teams are near the top of their respective conferences. I saw Vandy take apart South Carolina in Columbia this year and they would destroy the Zips. Maryland finished near the top of a real conference as did Wisconsin and Purdue. UofA finished second in the worst conference in the country and was destroyed twice by the regular season champion. The Zips lost to a bad OU team in the MAC Championship. There is no way they beat either of these teams.

Next year, I need everyone to do me a favor. I asked a similar favor after football season when I asked everyone to stop posting as if it is the 1950s and it has taken a little. Next year, I need everyone to go to a top level conference game somewhere driveable from NE Ohio...meaning the Big East or Big Ten. Go with an open mind and really think about the Zips position and college basketball and ask whether or not they could really be even competitive in one of those leagues. If you come to the conclusion the Zips fall short, it doesn't make you a bad fan.

I go to both ACC and SEC games here in the south and I can no longer convince myself what I watch at a MAC basketball game is even similar.

We could have beaten Purdue. They are weaksauce without Robbie Hummell.

[Dave in Green]

..... UofA finished second in the worst conference in the country and was destroyed twice by the regular season champion. .....

Exaggeration is a common way to make a point in internet debates. But for the sake of accuracy, the MAC is far from the worst conference in the country. The MAC's final regular season conference RPI average was exactly .5, which placed the conference 16th of 33 D1 conferences (actually, 32 conferences plus independents). There are 15 conferences with higher ratings and 17 ranked behind the MAC.

I don't know about the rest of the folks reading this, but I don't have to be told that the MAC is the worst conference in the country to make the otherwise valid point that there are about 100 D1 teams in the country, mostly from the big power conferences, that would be likely to beat the Zips in any given game, and that the top teams could be expected to beat the Zips pretty badly. That's just reality.

[GP1]

..... UofA finished second in the worst conference in the country and was destroyed twice by the regular season champion. .....

Exaggeration is a common way to make a point in internet debates. But for the sake of accuracy, the MAC is far from the worst conference in the country. The MAC's final regular season conference RPI average was exactly .5, which placed the conference 16th of 33 D1 conferences (actually, 32 conferences plus independents). There are 15 conferences with higher ratings and 17 ranked behind the MAC.

I don't know about the rest of the folks reading this, but I don't have to be told that the MAC is the worst conference in the country to make the otherwise valid point that there are about 100 D1 teams in the country, mostly from the big power conferences, that would be likely to beat the Zips in any given game, and that the top teams could be expected to beat the Zips pretty badly. That's just reality.

I could really care less what the RPI rankings say. I think the Great GP1 Laugh-O-Meter is a much more accurate indicator of conference quality. I know what I see and I know I laugh a lot when watching MAC games. The MAC is horrible.

[Buckzip]

All those teams would beat us. Sorry to be negative, but this is the same thinking that so many had feeling like the football team could beat Indiana. Would not happen.

[meatwad]

I could really care less what the RPI rankings say. I think the Great GP1 Laugh-O-Meter is a much more accurate indicator of conference quality. I know what I see and I know I laugh a lot when watching MAC games. The MAC is horrible.

You ever tested the Laugh-O-Meter at a Big Sky game? How about the Mid-Eastern Conference? Perhaps you have seen a ton of SWAC games?

Point is, we all know that the MAC is not nearly as bad as those conferences. Why would you even try to argue such?

[Dr Z]

All those teams would beat us. Sorry to be negative, but this is the same thinking that so many had feeling like the football team could beat Indiana. Would not happen.

I don't think that is a fair comparison due to the suspension of your starting QB the day before the game. If I could magically take PN16 today, and place him in that game as your starting QB, I think we have a 50/50 chance against IU (even with that crud defensive scheme). I'll go to my grave believing that, and it will take an in person apology from CJ himself to forgive that let down of a day.

I respect GP1's laugh-o-meter more than the RPI, so I'll have to go with that for now. Remember, he who laughs last, laughs the loudest. TBD.

[GP1]

I could really care less what the RPI rankings say. I think the Great GP1 Laugh-O-Meter is a much more accurate indicator of conference quality. I know what I see and I know I laugh a lot when watching MAC games. The MAC is horrible.

You ever tested the Laugh-O-Meter at a Big Sky game? How about the Mid-Eastern Conference? Perhaps you have seen a ton of SWAC games?

Point is, we all know that the MAC is not nearly as bad as those conferences. Why would you even try to argue such?

Maybe it isn't as bad, but it is closer to those conferences than major conferences.

The Laugh-O-Meter does not get tested much watching those conferences. The MAC is the only mid major conference I will watch long enough to test the meter.

[GP1]

I respect GP1's laugh-o-meter more than the RPI, so I'll have to go with that for now. Remember, he who laughs last, laughs the loudest. TBD.

Even with my concerns over the Laugh-O-Meters ability to predict the game Saturday, it is still very accurate. Have not run the Level 4 diagnostic on it yet.....

[GoZips]

This is where the MAC Championship game was lost.

It was lost a few months back. It was lost because our kids were not well prepared. They played their

hearts out, to a man. No one should lay any blame on the kids. Not an iota.

How often have I made a point of the fact that Steve McNees is not a point guard? KD failed to

develop any of his three (count them, three point guards). KD pulled a Dan Hipsher. KD was not willing

to "risk", as if that is valid, losing a game or two in out of conference play by playing Humpty, Ronnie and

Alex at the point. Steve and Darryl are two pretty darn good shooting guards. I think Steve showed his

metal again Saturday with his open court shooting.

It was apparent the other day that Ohio had two quick, shooters in Bassett and Cooper. Where was the

game plan to run these rascals down? With six guards you would think that Akron could keep fresh legs

on both of them all the time. But, you have to play all six guards in order to do that. Ole Dan, er, KD,

did not have the courage, guts, intestinal fortitude, balls, nads, what ever, to risk playing kids he let rot

on the bench all year.

This loss belongs to KD. He has been consistently out coached for the past several games. I love the guy.

I want him to improve as the coach. I want him to develop his kids. and, put together game plans that

attack the opponent.

John Groce should have been the MAC Coach of the Year. He clearly out foxed Hip jr.

As for defense .. what defense? KD, you boast of your team's defense. What kind of a defense never gets

into the classic defensive stance? Did that go out of style with Gene Hackman in Hoosiers?

Its fairly easy to shoot over even seven footers when their hands are in their pockets. I want to see real

defense. Stifling defense that the other team is continually forced to adjust to. The Zips defense is a joke.

For the umpteen time I want to point out once again what I said about Steve and the end of the half

turnover that is not counted as a turnover. Steve dribbled and dribbled until the clock was nearly gone.

Then, a weak pass to the middle that went out of bounds. Cooper drives the length of the floor and scores.

But, stupid old fan (me) does not know what the hell he is talking about.

I could say a heck of a lot more. But, like most of the rest of you, I'm way too steamed.

Green Bay will be a stern test for the poor defense of the Zips. How can they guard three shooters

when guarding one is a problem? Akron needs a point guard. They have three nice PGs, all rotting

on the bench. Steve plays out of position because coach Hipsher II lacks the nads to trust his kids.

[Zip_ME87]

I respect GP1's laugh-o-meter more than the RPI, so I'll have to go with that for now. Remember, he who laughs last, laughs the loudest. TBD.

Even with my concerns over the Laugh-O-Meters ability to predict the game Saturday, it is still very accurate. Have not run the Level 4 diagnostic on it yet.....

Could you try a positive approach for a month, perhaps a day...even a minute? I don't think any Zips fan thought that the MAC Championship game would be anything other than close. But, for you to say that you would predict the way that it worked out is a LAUGH. I'm sure you knew that the Zips would have to score a 3-pointer to send it to overtime and then would lose in overtime. And if you mean that you predicted a loss, than that is a huge laugh. Had the result gone the other way, I could just as easily say I predicted a win.

As far as the MAC being the worst conference in D1 basketball, you are wrong. I agree it's bad and is closer to the low end than the top end. But, personally, I'm sick of the overstatement of the negative. I'll take the rose colored glasses of those who thought we could beat Indiana in football to those who claimed "no way" any day. In order to win, you have to believe that you can win.

[Dave in Green]

..... UofA finished second in the worst conference in the country and was destroyed twice by the regular season champion. .....

Exaggeration is a common way to make a point in internet debates. But for the sake of accuracy, the MAC is far from the worst conference in the country. The MAC's final regular season conference RPI average was exactly .5, which placed the conference 16th of 33 D1 conferences (actually, 32 conferences plus independents). There are 15 conferences with higher ratings and 17 ranked behind the MAC.

I don't know about the rest of the folks reading this, but I don't have to be told that the MAC is the worst conference in the country to make the otherwise valid point that there are about 100 D1 teams in the country, mostly from the big power conferences, that would be likely to beat the Zips in any given game, and that the top teams could be expected to beat the Zips pretty badly. That's just reality.

I could really care less what the RPI rankings say. I think the Great GP1 Laugh-O-Meter is a much more accurate indicator of conference quality. I know what I see and I know I laugh a lot when watching MAC games. The MAC is horrible.

Others just laugh at the hyperbole. By all serious measures, the MAC is neither great nor awful when objectively compared with all other D1 conferences. It's worse than the best and better than the worst. In other words, it's just average.

[Captain Kangaroo]

Others just laugh at the hyperbole. By all serious measures, the MAC is neither great nor awful when objectively compared with all other D1 conferences. It's worse than the best and better than the worst. In other words, it's just average.

The frustrating thing for an "old-timer" is the fact that, only 8-or-so years ago, the MAC was a lot better. We were getting NBA lottery picks, winning NCAA tourney games and getting at-large NCAA tourney bids.

If I'd only followed the MAC for the past 5 years, I wouldn't really care much about the level of play. But I've watched MAC hoops erode for a while, and I want to see it return to a level where you can realistically argue our upper-tier teams could compete with the best of the MVC, or the Butler's of the world.

2010 was a step back towards respectability for the MAC. But there's a long way to go.

[GP1]

I respect GP1's laugh-o-meter more than the RPI, so I'll have to go with that for now. Remember, he who laughs last, laughs the loudest. TBD.

Even with my concerns over the Laugh-O-Meters ability to predict the game Saturday, it is still very accurate. Have not run the Level 4 diagnostic on it yet.....

Could you try a positive approach for a month, perhaps a day...even a minute? I don't think any Zips fan thought that the MAC Championship game would be anything other than close. But, for you to say that you would predict the way that it worked out is a LAUGH. I'm sure you knew that the Zips would have to score a 3-pointer to send it to overtime and then would lose in overtime. And if you mean that you predicted a loss, than that is a huge laugh. Had the result gone the other way, I could just as easily say I predicted a win.

I think you misunderstand the Laugh-O-Meter. At no point did the LOM register a laugh at the Zips on Saturday. It registered several at OU. The Zips should have won based upon the LOM results. If that isn't positive, I don't know what is.

[GP1]

2010 was a step back towards respectability for the MAC. But there's a long way to go.

There are a couple of ways a fan could read this portion of your post. One would be the conferece could move forward to respectability. If so, how?

The other way would be we have a long way to go before really sucking and are moving in that direction. If so, how do they stop it?

I really don't blame a lot of the problems the MAC/UofA has competing at the highest level on them. Although they do have some blame. The truth is, the NCAA makes deals that so favor major schools in major conferences, it is hard for us to compete so for every step we take forward, the bigger conferences are taking five steps forward.

[xu9697]

Comparing it to last year, where Gonzaga was a TERRIBLE draw for Akron, I would have felt better about any of those match-ups. Not saying we WOULD have beaten them, but I would have felt more comfortable in the possiblity of an upset.

Purdue w/out Hummel is about a 6-7 seed that garnered a 4.

Vandy is damn tough and would have been the toughest draw.

Maryland= just not buying them in a weaker than normal ACC.

Wisconsin plays MAC basketball..just with better players overall. We certainly could have matched their style and had a shot towards the end (esp with Stevie McNees)!!

[Zips Win!]

Great! We made the CBI. Congratulations.

Any way you slice it, in the words of Charles Barkley, yesterday was a tur-a-ble day.

Black Sunday will be followed by 3 weeks of March Sadness in the Zips Win! household.

You buckeye honks and others who have alma maters IN the tournament continue to pump the "building process" at UA, yet you all get to go home and watch "your" school play. I get the CBI...Wonderful!

Now I know what the great Captain Kangaroo was talking about when he spoke of getting tired of talking about the teams that are more athletic than the Zips. He must be on John Calipari's speed dial. I heard Cal on the radio this morning and he hit the nail on the head.

Medlock, Cooper, Bassett and Kool all, may or may not be athletic. They are however, as Calipari would term them, shot-makers. All have the ability to create space and make shots. I will promise to refrain from wanting to be more athletic in the future and will begin to beg KD to get us some more SHOT-MAKERS.

GZ- Please, calling KD Hip jr is insulting. You can always blame the coach, I know he can take it. And sure, I would like to have developed a point guard to slide McNees over. But Humpty was given ample chances to take the job and he didn't. I know we all have to be careful and not publicly criticise how a player performs or be called on the carpet for it. But once in a while the players have to take some responsibility for their development.

Get me some shot-makers and we are not having this discussion.

[GP1]

I will promise to refrain from wanting to be more athletic in the future and will begin to beg KD to get us some more SHOT-MAKERS.

All good points.

I've been reading this board for a long time now. My understanding is we are getting kids who are good scorers in high school, but they get here and they can't throw the ball into the ocean. How does that happen?

Another thing. Most of us know Jim Boeheim is the coach of Syracuse. He plays a 2-3 defense because he is convinced college players can't shoot anymore so he forces them to play to their weakness. Is the secret to get shooters and play a 2-3?

[Dr Z]

I've been reading this board for a long time now. My understanding is we are getting kids who are good scorers in high school, but they get here and they can't throw the ball into the ocean. How does that happen?

If it were a multiple choice question, some of the answers might be: A.) They spend all their time at practice on defense. B.) They play on a team with a long bench. C.) Talent was misjudged. D.) All of the above

Is the secret to get shooters and play a 2-3?

IMO, yes. I brought this up in another thread and it went over like a lead balloon.

[zippy5]

How one could still question McNeese is beyond me. A shooting guard isn't called that because he shoots a lot...mcneese had a HELL of a tournament, and I have to believe it wouldn't have happened if he didn't have the ball in his hands as much (being a 2 guard) would he have hit either if his game tying threes if he wasn't bringing the ball up the court? Steve is a tremendous point guard for this team.

[meatwad]

Maybe it isn't as bad, but it is closer to those conferences than major conferences.

Agreed.

[GoZips]

Medlock, Cooper, Bassett and Kool all, may or may not be athletic. They are however, as Calipari would term them, shot-makers. All have the ability to create space and make shots. I will promise to refrain from wanting to be more athletic in the future and will begin to beg KD to get us some more SHOT-MAKERS.

GZ- Please, calling KD Hip jr is insulting. You can always blame the coach, I know he can take it. And sure, I would like to have developed a point guard to slide McNees over. But Humpty was given ample chances to take the job and he didn't. I know we all have to be careful and not publicly criticise how a player performs or be called on the carpet for it. But once in a while the players have to take some responsibility for their development.

Get me some shot-makers and we are not having this discussion.

The Zips have an excellent shot "maker" in Steve McNees. Steve just has to be allowed to play the

position he plays the best .. the two guard.

As for me refering to KD as Hip jr. etc. Who is the head coach who got comfortable with playing a

great player out of position because he was fearful of the other talent he failed to develop or trust?

Was it me?

Evaluate, develop, encourage, teach. That's a coach's role. All of you know that I love KD. Does that

fact disqualify me from having an opinion? Sadly, it will piss him off.

Akron already has the players. None of them are less than really good. The team underachieved.

Blame the kids? Blame the staff? I never blame 18-22 year olds kids.

[Dave in Green]

Others just laugh at the hyperbole. By all serious measures, the MAC is neither great nor awful when objectively compared with all other D1 conferences. It's worse than the best and better than the worst. In other words, it's just average.

The frustrating thing for an "old-timer" is the fact that, only 8-or-so years ago, the MAC was a lot better. We were getting NBA lottery picks, winning NCAA tourney games and getting at-large NCAA tourney bids.

If I'd only followed the MAC for the past 5 years, I wouldn't really care much about the level of play. But I've watched MAC hoops erode for a while, and I want to see it return to a level where you can realistically argue our upper-tier teams could compete with the best of the MVC, or the Butler's of the world.

2010 was a step back towards respectability for the MAC. But there's a long way to go.

Amen. I went to a lot of MAC tournaments where the Zips weren't even playing just to see good teams and good players. The MAC is down right now compared with its historic average.

RPI doesn't tell the whole story. But it's a generally accepted measurement that at least gives a partial snapshot. Looking at how the MAC has ranked in RPI compared with other D1 conferences over the past 11 seasons, last year was the low point and this year is an improvement, though not back to the historic highs:

12 (1999-2000)

15 (2000-2001)

12 (2001-2002)

11 (2002-2003)

14 (2003-2004)

10 (2004-2005)

16 (2005-2006)

14 (2006-2007)

12 (2007-2008)

21 (2008-2009)

16 (2009-2010)

MAC High point: 10 (2004-2005)

MAC Low Point: 21 (2008-2009)

MAC 11-Season Average: 13.9

MAC 9-Season Average Prior to the Last 2 Seasons: 12.9

Looking below at this season's final regular season conference RPI, the MAC was .024 behind 10th place (WAC). That .024 represents the same level the MAC rated above the 20th ranked Ohio Valley Conference. Consistently contending for the 10th place in conference RPI is a realistic short term goal for the MAC because it was there not that many years ago. To return to that historic high level (10th) would require either a few MAC teams getting a lot stronger or all of the teams getting at least a little stronger.

0.586 Big 12

0.581 Big East

0.575 ACC

0.561 SEC

0.551 Big Ten

0.543 A-10

0.542 Mountain West

0.539 Pac 10

0.538 Missouri Valley

0.524 WAC

0.518 C-USA

0.510 CAA

0.508 West Coast

0.507 Horizon

0.503 MAAC

0.500 MAC

0.484 SoCon

0.480 Big Sky

0.478 Big West

0.476 Ohio Valley

0.473 Sun Belt

0.472 Ivy League

0.469 Summit League

0.466 America East

0.464 Atlantic Sun

0.462 Southland

0.455 Big South

0.451 Patriot

0.441 NEC

0.434 MEAC

0.416 SWAC

0.416 Independents

0.383 Great West

[Quickzips]

Personally looking at the 4 seeds:

Maryland has what I think is one of the most exciting players in the country in Greivis Vazquez and they have a lot of guys around him that know how to play with him. I think that would have been a double digit loss.

Vandy is a team we might have been able to stay with. This is where I think Zeke would have been a factor. Ogilvy is a nice veteran big man for them, but I think Zeke's athleticism would have given him fits. A lot of what Vandy does runs through Ogilvy and I think we could have kept it close here, but I think experience would have favored Vandy, but I don't think they would have beat us by more than 7. Possibility for an upset existed here if a few bounces go our way.

Wisconsin plays a lot like us. Tough, hard nosed, grind it out basketball. I think they are the more talented team though. We could have hung with them for a while, I think, but in the end they probably would have pulled away to a relatively comfortable win.

As others have pointed out, Purdue without Robbie Hummell would have been ripe for the picking. That team was in consideration as a 1 or 2 seed with him. Without him, they will be hard pressed to make it out of the first round. I think this would have been our best shot at an upset.