Arkansas Pine-Bluff

[Captain Kangaroo]

Arkansas Pine-Bluff played their first 11 games on the road against the following competition:

Colorado, Texas-El Paso, Akron, Arizona State, Michigan, Oklahoma State, Georgia Tech, Missouri, Kansas State and Oregon

After 11 games they had 0 wins, but a fat wallet.

They won 17 of their 21 conference games and made the NCAA tourney.

[Quickzips]

Not sure it is the exact opposite of Dambrot's scheduling idea. The basic premise of the KD scheduling philosophy is that nothing matters except winning the conference tournament because our conference isn't getting more than the 1 auto-bid from the tournament champion. Pine-Bluff I'm sure is aware that the SWAC isn't going to be getting more than their one auto-bid as well, which they got this year. It isn't like this team got an at-large bid like Utah State, and they wouldn't have if they had lost their conference tournament. It should also be noted that, although they are in the tournament they are playing in the enviable "play in game" against Winthrop. I really doubt that this kind of a guantlet type schedule is a good thing for the Zips. Makes me wonder where Miami would have wound up had they won 2 more games in Cleveland.

[Dave in Green]

A real odd duck here. AP-B belongs to the mighty SWAC, whose conference RPI ranks 31 of 33 D1 conferences, ahead of only Independents and the brand new Great West conference.

Despite all of their early games against high level competition, they finished second in the SWAC regular season with a 14-4 conference record to Jackson State (17-1), which beat AP-B twice during the regular season. In the SWAC tournament, favored Jackson State was upset by Grambling and AP-B squeaked its way to the championship and NCAA bid by beating weaker SWAC teams.

The SWAC is so bad that even with that opening string of 11 games against many high RPI teams, by the time AP-B finished playing its conference schedule, it wound up with an SOS of 279.

If we think the MAC West is weak, the SWAC is on life support:

180 Arkansas-Pine Bluff

201 Jackson State

231 Texas Southern

273 Prairie View A&M

277 Alabama State

328 Mississippi Valley State

331 Alabama A&M

339 Grambling State

342 Southern University

346 Alcorn State

[Dr Z]

That's all well and good, but what's their RPI?

Edit: Beat me to the punch by 30 seconds.

Want to be the man, schedule like the man!

[skip-zip]

Some of this is just venting frustration, but here goes.......

I'm getting more and more weary of the "we won't get more than one bid" argument. Why? Because we've been down that road each of the last 4 years, and got there ONE time. ALL of our teams in those 4 years could have had a chance at an at-large, IF our schedule had only given them a chance.

If someone is fine with watching our only NCAA hope vanish with last-second 3 pointers, and the #9 seed going on a hot streak, then you've surely gotten what you asked for.

Ken+ had an RPI in the 20s or 30s in 2008. If they had not won the MAC tournament, they had a pretty fair chance of getting in.

I just don't understand why anyone on here doesn't want the opportunity to have that 2nd chance.

[g-mann17]

Some of this is just venting frustration, but here goes.......

I'm getting more and more weary of the "we won't get more than one bid" argument. Why? Because we've been down that road each of the last 4 years, and got there ONE time. ALL of our teams in those 4 years could have had a chance at an at-large, IF our schedule had only given them a chance.

If someone is fine with watching our only NCAA hope vanish with last-second 3 pointers, and the #9 seed going on a hot streak, then you've surely gotten what you asked for.

Ken+ had an RPI in the 20s or 30s in 2008. If they had not won the MAC tournament, they had a pretty fair chance of getting in.

I just don't understand why anyone on here doesn't want the opportunity to have that 2nd chance.

I think you miss the point.

The point isn't "we don't want that second chance" it's "we aren't afforded that second chance". We can play all the tough opponents we want, they stopped giving the MAC schools a second chance.

You bring up 2008, look at 2007 and what happened. Everyone (experts included) figured Miami and Akron would be in the tournament. What happened?

[Captain Kangaroo]

You bring up 2008, look at 2007 and what happened. Everyone (experts included) figured Miami and Akron would be in the tournament. What happened?

People expected the 26-win Travis-Joyce-Dials Zips to be in the NIT. No one expected them to get an NCAA bid.

No Miami team in the last 5 years has merited at-large consideration. No MAC team in the last 5+ years has done what it takes to merit at-large consideration. The best MAC basketball has been at the "NIT/CBI" level for several years. And even then, only the Zips have won ANY post-season games in the past 5 years. The rest of the MAC is o-fer. O-fer 7 years...combined...all MAC schools, save Akron.

Grouse about the RPI til the cows come home...we need to get better.

[GP1]

Arkansas Pine-Bluff played their first 11 games on the road against the following competition:

Colorado, Texas-El Paso, Akron, Arizona State, Michigan, Oklahoma State, Georgia Tech, Missouri, Kansas State and Oregon

After 11 games they had 0 wins, but a fat wallet.

They won 17 of their 21 conference games and made the NCAA tourney.

I don't want their schedule, but I don't want ours. There has to be another way to line pockets and win.

[skip-zip]

Some of this is just venting frustration, but here goes.......

I'm getting more and more weary of the "we won't get more than one bid" argument. Why? Because we've been down that road each of the last 4 years, and got there ONE time. ALL of our teams in those 4 years could have had a chance at an at-large, IF our schedule had only given them a chance.

If someone is fine with watching our only NCAA hope vanish with last-second 3 pointers, and the #9 seed going on a hot streak, then you've surely gotten what you asked for.

Ken+ had an RPI in the 20s or 30s in 2008. If they had not won the MAC tournament, they had a pretty fair chance of getting in.

I just don't understand why anyone on here doesn't want the opportunity to have that 2nd chance.

I think you miss the point.

The point isn't "we don't want that second chance" it's "we aren't afforded that second chance". We can play all the tough opponents we want, they stopped giving the MAC schools a second chance.

You bring up 2008, look at 2007 and what happened. Everyone (experts included) figured Miami and Akron would be in the tournament. What happened?

Prove me wrong, but I believe Ken+'s RPI in 2008 was far better than what we had in 2007. They really had a legitimate chance. Emphasis on the word CHANCE. As in, they did some things to gave themselves at least an opportunity to get into the NCAA by some other mean, if the MAC tourney didn't work out.

I think people were surprised that we didn't make the NIT in 2007. But, I don't recall anyone who was surprised we didn't make the NCAA.

[Dave in Green]

Some of this is just venting frustration, but here goes.......

I'm getting more and more weary of the "we won't get more than one bid" argument. Why? Because we've been down that road each of the last 4 years, and got there ONE time. ALL of our teams in those 4 years could have had a chance at an at-large, IF our schedule had only given them a chance.

If someone is fine with watching our only NCAA hope vanish with last-second 3 pointers, and the #9 seed going on a hot streak, then you've surely gotten what you asked for.

Ken+ had an RPI in the 20s or 30s in 2008. If they had not won the MAC tournament, they had a pretty fair chance of getting in.

I just don't understand why anyone on here doesn't want the opportunity to have that 2nd chance.

Here's the challenge. For the last 6 years, the 3 best RPI teams excluded from the NCAA tournament were all non-BCS affiliated schools. No top 50 RPI team from a power conference was left out of the tournament this year, which is the way it usually works. The challenge for a MAC school to get an at-large bid is monumental. It would require actually beating a fair number of high RPI teams, not merely scheduling them.

Here are the top 3 schools (RPI) passed over for the past 6 years. Pay special attention to 2005:

2010 -- Rhode Island (40), Wichita State (43), Alabama Birmingham (45)

2009 -- San Diego State (34), Creighton (40), Alabama Birmingham (46)

2008 -- Dayton (32), Illinois State (33), Massachusetts (42)

2007 -- Air Force (30), Missouri State (36), Bradley (38)

2006 -- Missouri State (21), Hofstra (30), Creighton (39)

2005 -- Miami-Ohio (39), Wichita State (45), Buffalo (46)

[RACER]

im sure the fan base would be really pleased starting 0-11.that's a good way to build a program.

how did it help miami this year to prepare for the ncaa.kd has said that he will play anyone as long as they give us a return home game.the problem is teams don't want to play at the jar.they want a one and done.we have seen what that does to mac football.every akron fan would love to see duke,n.c.,clemson ect come to the jar.guess what? it will never happen.the only way top schools will play akron is on thier home court.the ncaa selection process has no selection

critieria. if akron played a harder schedule this year,and lost 3 more games.the comittee would say we don't have any quality wins.we had 26 wins and did not even make the nit.the comittee would say our schedule is to soft.the mac is a one bid leauge.no matter what the schedule you play,or how many games you win it's a one bid league.

nothing will change that.if the ncaa comittee did not take acc 23-8 (10-6)virgina tech team this year.there is no mac team that's going to get an at large bid.

[Dave in Green]

Virginia Tech's RPI is 57, so they just missed the cut of being a BCS school with an RPI of 50 or better.

[skip-zip]

Some of this is just venting frustration, but here goes.......

I'm getting more and more weary of the "we won't get more than one bid" argument. Why? Because we've been down that road each of the last 4 years, and got there ONE time. ALL of our teams in those 4 years could have had a chance at an at-large, IF our schedule had only given them a chance.

If someone is fine with watching our only NCAA hope vanish with last-second 3 pointers, and the #9 seed going on a hot streak, then you've surely gotten what you asked for.

Ken+ had an RPI in the 20s or 30s in 2008. If they had not won the MAC tournament, they had a pretty fair chance of getting in.

I just don't understand why anyone on here doesn't want the opportunity to have that 2nd chance.

Here's the challenge. For the last 6 years, the 3 best RPI teams excluded from the NCAA tournament were all non-BCS affiliated schools. No top 50 RPI team from a power conference was left out of the tournament this year, which is the way it usually works. The challenge for a MAC school to get an at-large bid is monumental. It would require actually beating a fair number of high RPI teams, not merely scheduling them.

Here are the top 3 schools (RPI) passed over for the past 6 years. Pay special attention to 2005:

2010 -- Rhode Island (40), Wichita State (43), Alabama Birmingham (45)

2009 -- San Diego State (34), Creighton (40), Alabama Birmingham (46)

2008 -- Dayton (32), Illinois State (33), Massachusetts (42)

2007 -- Air Force (30), Missouri State (36), Bradley (38)

2006 -- Missouri State (21), Hofstra (30), Creighton (39)

2005 -- Miami-Ohio (39), Wichita State (45), Buffalo (46)

I am. And I see two teams from the MAC who had a chance to get in.

It's upsetting to me that we haven't been in that position, after some of our recent 20-plus win seasons. And a stronger SOS can help that.

[Dave in Green]

Skip, I think you're missing the point. The RPI numbers were good, but there was NO CHANCE OF GETTING IN. NONE. ZERO. NADA.

The only way those RPI numbers get you in with the NCAA selection committee is if you're in a BCS conference. If you are in the MAC, you might get in with an RPI of 10. Maybe.

[zippyman23]

RPI is meaningless to getting selected for both BCS and non-BCS schools. You need quality wins (against Top-50 RPI) to get into the tourney.

[Captain Kangaroo]

Skip, I think you're missing the point. The RPI numbers were good, but there was NO CHANCE OF GETTING IN. NONE. ZERO. NADA.

The only way those RPI numbers get you in with the NCAA selection committee is if you're in a BCS conference. If you are in the MAC, you might get in with an RPI of 10. Maybe.

Dave - You are absolutely correct. Those two MAC teams had NO CHANCE of getting in the tourney. NONE. ZERO. NADA.

Why? - Because they stunk. Period. Stinky teams have no chance of getting into the NCAA tourney.

Miami began the 2004-5 season with wins over Purdue and Xavier. They proceeded to go 16-10 in their remaining regular season games. They were 3-9 away from home. They lost to OU in the 2nd round of the MAC tourney.

Miami was 19-11 in 2004-5. But you think, because they had a nice RPI, that they somehow got ripped off by the NCAA selection committee? Come on.

If Miami was 22-8, with those big OOC wins, they're dancing. But they followed up those wins with NIT-level play. And that's where they ended up. And despite their gaudy, worthless RPI, they lost to TCU in the 1st round of the NIT.

Buffalo? I've watched Buffalo since they entered the MAC. At no time have they had a team worthy of NCAA at-large consideration. Their best teams were lucky to merit the NIT. And the NIT results prove it.

[skip-zip]

Skip, I think you're missing the point. The RPI numbers were good, but there was NO CHANCE OF GETTING IN. NONE. ZERO. NADA.

The only way those RPI numbers get you in with the NCAA selection committee is if you're in a BCS conference. If you are in the MAC, you might get in with an RPI of 10. Maybe.

Dave,

You may be right. Who knows if they would have gotten in if their RPI was 10, 20 or 30 points higher. What would have happened if Miami had won a couple more games in 2005? Or, if Ken+ had not won the MAC tournament in 2008? Or, if Akron had won a few more games in 2007? We don't know exactly what it would take. All we know is that it's not happening.

But it really doesn't matter. Either way, being Buffalo or Miami in March of 2005 sure beats knowing that you probably have been eliminated from at-large consideration by losing 1 or 2 of your non-conference games in December.

The point is....many teams DO have schedules that give them a chance at an at-large bid. We do not.

[MDZip]

Well we got beat by an NCAA first round winner. Arkansas PB won the play-in game. On ESPN they mentioned all of the teams in thier brutal early saeson road warrior trip that started them off 0-11. I think ESPN mentioned every team they lost to except the Zips.

[Dave in Green]

Skip, I think you're missing the point. The RPI numbers were good, but there was NO CHANCE OF GETTING IN. NONE. ZERO. NADA.

The only way those RPI numbers get you in with the NCAA selection committee is if you're in a BCS conference. If you are in the MAC, you might get in with an RPI of 10. Maybe.

Dave - You are absolutely correct. Those two MAC teams had NO CHANCE of getting in the tourney. NONE. ZERO. NADA.

Why? - Because they stunk. Period. Stinky teams have no chance of getting into the NCAA tourney.

Miami began the 2004-5 season with wins over Purdue and Xavier. They proceeded to go 16-10 in their remaining regular season games. They were 3-9 away from home. They lost to OU in the 2nd round of the MAC tourney.

Miami was 19-11 in 2004-5. But you think, because they had a nice RPI, that they somehow got ripped off by the NCAA selection committee? Come on.

If Miami was 22-8, with those big OOC wins, they're dancing. But they followed up those wins with NIT-level play. And that's where they ended up. And despite their gaudy, worthless RPI, they lost to TCU in the 1st round of the NIT.

Buffalo? I've watched Buffalo since they entered the MAC. At no time have they had a team worthy of NCAA at-large consideration. Their best teams were lucky to merit the NIT. And the NIT results prove it.

I make no claims about the actual strengths of any of these teams. The one and only thing I'm saying is that having an RPI of 50 or better is used by the NCAA selection committee to help qualify BCS conference teams that did not otherwise qualify for the tournament. For a mid-major, having an RPI as high as 21 (see Missouri State) is not enough to get the job done.

Actually, when you analyze Missouri State's 2005-2006 season, it was not that spectacular. They had a strong SOS of 66 but finished 22-9 overall and 12-6 in the MVC. What helped them achieve such high SOS and RPI ratings was that a number of MVC teams that season had strong SOS and RPI ratings:

2005-2006 MVC RPI

21 Missouri State (22-9)

25 Northern Iowa (23-10)

27 Wichita State (26-9)

29 Southern Illinois (22-11)

33 Bradley (22-11)

39 Creighton (20-10)

162 Indiana State (13-16)

175 Drake (12-19)

191 Evansville (10-19)

233 Illinois State (9-19)

However you cut it, it's an absolutely spectacular performance for any non-BCS conference to have more than half of its teams (6 of 10) in the top 40 RPI, and requires a concerted effort by an entire conference to achieve. It may never be duplicated.

This is also one of the best examples of the failure of the RPI system to capture true team strength, and why RPI cannot be used as the exclusive measurement of team strength. It's why RPI and SOS are but 2 of many measuring sticks the NCAA selection committee uses to select teams to fill in the final positions in the 65-team field.

If RPI was a perfect measuring stick, you could just take the teams with the top 65 RPI to fill the field.

Your points about high-RPI MAC teams not being worthy of competing in the NCAA tournament is absolutely in line with the thinking of the NCAA selection committee -- high RPI and SOS alone are not sufficient to prove that a mid-major deserves being invited over a BCS conference team with a lower RPI.

[skip-zip]

How about we work on the things we CAN control (better SOS, RPI), instead of hoping for changes in the minds of those in selection committees, and the instruments they may or may not use to evaluate us.

[Captain Kangaroo]

Our schedule & 20+ wins are like a girl with really big boobs.

We are astounded that no guys will pay attention to us because we have such big boobs?! It is inexplicable!?

Well...we are also 297 lbs...have a uni-brow...haven't showered in a month...and pick our nose constantly.

Until we lose some weight, shave our eyebrows, bath regularly and stop picking our nose, our 24-win boobs are not going to get noticed by anyone. They are only a small piece of the puzzle. If the CBI is the only guy hitting on you, chances are you're CBI-level material. Accept it, or improve yourself.

[Dave in Green]

Skip, I'm all for the Zips going for higher SOS and RPI ratings. I just hate to think that any Zips fans would have unrealistic expectations that this alone could get the Zips or any other MAC team an at-large invitation from the NCAA selection committee.

Realistically, we all need to look at the history of high-RPI mid-majors and understand that it will be no different for the Zips. Short of an undefeated season, an RPI of 21 is close to an impossibility in a middle-of-the-road RPI conference like the MAC. But even if the Zips achieved a 21 RPI, we should not expect that the NCAA selection committee would treat UA any differently than they did Missouri State.

[Zipgrad1990]

Well we got beat by an NCAA first round winner. Arkansas PB won the play-in game. On ESPN they mentioned all of the teams in thier brutal early saeson road warrior trip that started them off 0-11. I think ESPN mentioned every team they lost to except the Zips.

I think you meant to say "WE BEAT AN NCAA first round winner".

Although I don't consider the play in game a first round win. We did beat an NCAA winner.

[skip-zip]

Skip, I'm all for the Zips going for higher SOS and RPI ratings. I just hate to think that any Zips fans would have unrealistic expectations that this alone could get the Zips or any other MAC team an at-large invitation from the NCAA selection committee.

Realistically, we all need to look at the history of high-RPI mid-majors and understand that it will be no different for the Zips. Short of an undefeated season, an RPI of 21 is close to an impossibility in a middle-of-the-road RPI conference like the MAC. But even if the Zips achieved a 21 RPI, we should not expect that the NCAA selection committee would treat UA any differently than they did Missouri State.

We at least know that just winning games is not good enough. Beyond that, we just don't know. But, I'm not thinking that too many people who have been around our program a long time expect us to get into the NCAA tournament just because we won 20-plus, and had a decent RPI.

Just for the sake of this topic, let me assume for a moment that a #21 RPI is not good enough, and we know that to be the case.

Then we need a schedule that gives us an opportunity to get higher than that. If not, then the regular season doesn't earn you very much besides a good MAC tournament seeding. And that doesn't seem to mean very much with a #5 and #9 seed winning the MAC tournament the last two years.

[ZachTheZip]

So long as we play the MAC West, there is no amount of top teams you can schedule to get a top 20 RPI. Look at Miami. They played the #2 non-conference schedule in the country and thanks to playing the MAC West their SOS finished at 78. Even if they had a bunch of non-conference wins, their SOS would be too low to get in the range that the committee wants. It's impossible to schedule yourself into the tournament individually. You need something else to go along with it, like a strong conference or a "brand name" like Gonzaga or Butler. A string run in the tournament in the past few years, something else. Scheduling alone won't do it.