Zip Watcher Posted April 4, 2011 Report Share Posted April 4, 2011 1) An easy schedule with 26 wins can still result in a complete lack of respect in national polls, and a complete shutout from the post-season selection committees. We were certainly "better" that year. Maybe even great compared to many other years. And it got us nowhere. So, we can wipe "easy schedule" off the board as an option, don't you think? We need to stop being ignorant to the fact that winning 20+ games with a poor overall SOS is helping us make up any ground on the national scene. If i remember correctly, we lost to Arkansas LR, Illinois-chicago, and Toledo in that season. No team with losses to these 3 will ever get an at large bid even if their record was 30-3. Toledo won the regular season that year, did they not? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skip-zip Posted April 4, 2011 Author Report Share Posted April 4, 2011 And you increase your chances of winning a big game when you play more of them. Right? If the goal is to have an occasional upset over a higher-ranked team, then, yes, I'd support scheduling lots of tough opponents to improve the statistical odds of scoring the occasional upset. But the real goal should be improving the overall performance of the team. So the real question should be what SOS increases your chances of becoming a better team -- an easy schedule, a balanced schedule, or a really tough schedule?If there was a simple answer, every team would be doing it. But there isn't a simple answer. I know of no conclusive study showing that teams that deliberately set up the toughest schedules tend to become better teams than those with more balanced schedules of weaker, moderate, and stronger teams. I suspect that the best all-around schedule is one that's balanced with a variety of opponents with varying levels of strength -- not too weak and not too strong overall. A fair question, except that we already know two things. 1) An easy schedule with 26 wins can still result in a complete lack of respect in national polls, and a complete shutout from the post-season selection committees. We were certainly "better" that year. Maybe even great compared to many other years. And it got us nowhere. So, we can wipe "easy schedule" off the board as an option, don't you think? We need to stop being ignorant to the fact that winning 20+ games with a poor overall SOS is helping us make up any ground on the national scene. 2) If "balanced" defines what we're doing now, then it's obviously not good enough since we weren't even in the talk for an at-large bid to the Big Dance in any of the last 6 seasons. Sprinkling Dayton and Minnesota into a 30 game schedule is just so far from where we need to be to get the job done. We weren't in talks for an at-large because we always manage to lose to a MAC West team or two, along with not winning against the top teams we actually did schedule. Dayton and Minnesota alone won't get us in, but Dayton, Minnesota, Miami, Temple, and Cleveland State might, if you can beat three or four of them and not lose to EMU and NIU. By the way, what's it like to be perpetually stuck in March 2005? The bad losses stunk, as Ada Zip points out too. But, come on. Our schedule strength was something like #158. Winning a few more games wouldn't have made any difference in terms of at-large talk. Two many other conference losses on top of that anyway. Plus, as I've pointed out many times before, you are putting pressure on 18 year old kids to play near-perfect through your entire schedule, and that doesn't happen. It stinks to be stuck in 2005. Unfortunately, it's also a prime example of where we stand nationally when we win almost all of our games, but have a weak SOS. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GP1 Posted April 4, 2011 Report Share Posted April 4, 2011 Plus, as I've pointed out many times before, you are putting pressure on 18 year old kids to play near-perfect through your entire schedule, and that doesn't happen. I don't think it is asking too much for an adult (most are older than 18) to live up to his potential from day one until the end of the season. There are games to be played in December and January just as there are games to be played in March. The expectations of this Zips program should be: 1. Win all the games they should win. No more losing to teams like NIU and EMU. No more slow starts. 2. Win the MAC East. 3. Win at least 33% of the games against major conference teams. 4. Minimum make the MAC Championship Game. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Valpo Zip Posted April 4, 2011 Report Share Posted April 4, 2011 1) An easy schedule with 26 wins can still result in a complete lack of respect in national polls, and a complete shutout from the post-season selection committees. We were certainly "better" that year. Maybe even great compared to many other years. And it got us nowhere. So, we can wipe "easy schedule" off the board as an option, don't you think? We need to stop being ignorant to the fact that winning 20+ games with a poor overall SOS is helping us make up any ground on the national scene. If i remember correctly, we lost to Arkansas LR, Illinois-chicago, and Toledo in that season. No team with losses to these 3 will ever get an at large bid even if their record was 30-3. Toledo won the regular season that year, did they not? Yes they did. And that loss took away our argument that the zips were the best team in the conference losing on a buzzer beater. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skip-zip Posted April 4, 2011 Author Report Share Posted April 4, 2011 Plus, as I've pointed out many times before, you are putting pressure on 18 year old kids to play near-perfect through your entire schedule, and that doesn't happen. I don't think it is asking too much for an adult (most are older than 18) to live up to his potential from day one until the end of the season. There are games to be played in December and January just as there are games to be played in March. The expectations of this Zips program should be: 1. Win all the games they should win. No more losing to teams like NIU and EMU. No more slow starts. 2. Win the MAC East. 3. Win at least 33% of the games against major conference teams. 4. Minimum make the MAC Championship Game. It still amazes me that some people appear to be so opposed to creating alot more opportunities to elevate our status nationally. We're far from where we need to be. This isn't an argument to put a bunch of Top 10 teams on our schedule. We didn't play a SINGLE top-notch team this year. How many teams did we play that were even in the Top 50? Nothing is going to change unless our SOS climbs at least 50 places higher. Just look at the resumes of some of the teams who are the last ones into the tournament. We aren't even remotely in the ballpark, even with a few more victories. College basketball players simply do not play well every time on the floor for 30-35 times a season. And that's not going to change. Yet, every year we put ouselves in a position to have to play to that level of perfection because we don't have an SOS that's even remotely close to where it needs to be. If we don't take some chances, and create more opportunities, nothing is going to change. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave in Green Posted April 4, 2011 Report Share Posted April 4, 2011 Skip, I think I've detected a disconnect in your logic. You seem to have it in firmly embedded in your mind that scheduling 10-15 games against national powers and winning the occasional one or two is going to somehow increase the Zips' standing in the world of college basketball above what it is now. Fuhgeddaboudit! Ain'tagonnahoppen! That strategy is not going to do the Zips any more good than it has helped Miami's standing in the world of college basketball. Miami has proven that it doesn't work. They schedule the toughest OOC schedule in the MAC, occasionally win one of those tough games, and have no higher standing in the world of college basketball than the Zips. If we learn from Miami's mistakes, it's not necessary for the Zips to repeat them. Winning a tough game or two is only a preliminary step. Next you have to prove that you can regularly beat highly ranked teams. Only then do you begin to get respect in the world of college basketball. The Zips currently have roughly the right number of tough games on their schedule to prove whether or not they can take the preliminary step of winning one or two of those games. I wouldn't argue against maybe having one or two more tough games on the schedule. But there comes a point when too many tough games does nothing but trade wins against weaker teams for losses against stronger teams. I'd argue that Miami is at that point right now, and it's not a good point for the Zips to aspire to. Please let me know if I'm missing something in your logic. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skip-zip Posted April 4, 2011 Author Report Share Posted April 4, 2011 Skip, I think I've detected a disconnect in your logic. You seem to have it in firmly embedded in your mind that scheduling 10-15 games against national powers and winning the occasional one or two is going to somehow increase the Zips' standing in the world of college basketball above what it is now. Fuhgeddaboudit! Ain'tagonnahoppen! That strategy is not going to do the Zips any more good than it has helped Miami's standing in the world of college basketball. Miami has proven that it doesn't work. They schedule the toughest OOC schedule in the MAC, occasionally win one of those tough games, and have no higher standing in the world of college basketball than the Zips. If we learn from Miami's mistakes, it's not necessary for the Zips to repeat them. Winning a tough game or two is only a preliminary step. Next you have to prove that you can regularly beat highly ranked teams. Only then do you begin to get respect in the world of college basketball. The Zips currently have roughly the right number of tough games on their schedule to prove whether or not they can take the preliminary step of winning one or two of those games. I wouldn't argue against maybe having one or two more tough games on the schedule. But there comes a point when too many tough games does nothing but trade wins against weaker teams for losses against stronger teams. I'd argue that Miami is at that point right now, and it's not a good point for the Zips to aspire to. Please let me know if I'm missing something in your logic. No, that's not my point at all. It's all about opportunities. Our current schedule doesn't have nearly enough opportunities to increase our status. And I clearly stated in my last post that it's not an argument that we should play a schedule loaded with national powers. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave in Green Posted April 4, 2011 Report Share Posted April 4, 2011 Skip, it's hard keeping up with all the stuff you're throwing out there. In the previous post I compared the lack of success by Miami in increasing their stature by playing a tough OOC schedule. This year, Miami played Ohio State, Kansas, Duke, Xavier, Cincinnati and Dayton along with some other decent OOC matchups. They even beat Xavier. What did it get them compared with the Zips? Miami finished the season with an overall record of 16-17 and an RPI of 107. The Zips finished the season with an overall record of 23-13 and an RPI of 101. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave in Green Posted April 4, 2011 Report Share Posted April 4, 2011 Skip, if you take a little kid, tie an anchor to his feet and throw him into a pool, you create the "opportunity" for him to become the world's greatest swimmer. But most likely you have condemned him to drowning. Creating a murderer's row OOC schedule creates more "opportunities" to pull the occasional upset. But most likely you have condemned the team to a terrible season record. I'm up for creating more opportunities to win big games after the Zips have proven that they're capable of winning one or more of their current opportunities. You can double your odds of winning the lotto if you buy two tickets instead of one. But the odds against you winning are still astronomical. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spin Posted April 4, 2011 Report Share Posted April 4, 2011 I agree. Let's beat the Cleveland States, Minnesotas, and Daytons. Then we can move further up the food chain. Getting smoked by Temple isn't going to inspire any real programs to give us a date. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skip-zip Posted April 4, 2011 Author Report Share Posted April 4, 2011 Skip, it's hard keeping up with all the stuff you're throwing out there. In the previous post I compared the lack of success by Miami in increasing their stature by playing a tough OOC schedule. This year, Miami played Ohio State, Kansas, Duke, Xavier, Cincinnati and Dayton along with some other decent OOC matchups. They even beat Xavier. What did it get them compared with the Zips? Miami finished the season with an overall record of 16-17 and an RPI of 107. The Zips finished the season with an overall record of 23-13 and an RPI of 101. More opportunities to make an impact nationally. Same answer as always. And maybe your conclusion could be that playing those games certainly didn't hurt their cause either. They had 4 more losses, but a similar RPI. And they still got to play in the MAC tournament as their 2nd opportunity to get to the dance, just like everyone else in the conference. And how do we know that playing that schedule didn't make Miami a better team than they would have been if they had not played those teams? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skip-zip Posted April 4, 2011 Author Report Share Posted April 4, 2011 Skip, if you take a little kid, tie an anchor to his feet and throw him into a pool, you create the "opportunity" for him to become the world's greatest swimmer. But most likely you have condemned him to drowning. Creating a murderer's row OOC schedule creates more "opportunities" to pull the occasional upset. But most likely you have condemned the team to a terrible season record. I'm up for creating more opportunities to win big games after the Zips have proven that they're capable of winning one or more of their current opportunities. You can double your odds of winning the lotto if you buy two tickets instead of one. But the odds against you winning are still astronomical. I sense this same "we're afraid to challenge ourselves because we might lose more games" mentality that's kept us at status-quo for the last 5+ years. And I know you're not alone. And again, where did I say that we should load our schedule with Top 10 teams? Murderer's Row? Hey...you stole that line from Gordon "foot-in-mouth" Gee. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave in Green Posted April 4, 2011 Report Share Posted April 4, 2011 Skip, nope, I just don't get your logic on this, and I'm really trying hard. You say you don't want the Zips to schedule top 10 teams, but you complain that the ones the Zips did schedule weren't strong enough. At one time or another during the season, Zips opponents Cleveland State, Dayton, Temple, Minnesota and Miami (FL) were all ranked fairly highly, and they all finished the season with RPIs between 29 and 81. So I don't know which teams you would find worthy of adding to the Zips OOC schedule, which is already pretty close to the OOC SOS of such teams as Butler and VCU. I repeat that I'm not against adding one or two tougher games in place of one or two weak sisters. But scheduling a much larger number of tougher OOC games when your team hasn't yet shown that it has the ability to win a single one continues to strike me as illogical. I'm just not buying into the concept of scheduling tougher than you've already proven you might be able to handle. Maybe it's because my parents taught me I had to finish everything on my plate before I could get seconds of anything. I'm not at all afraid of challenging the Zips. I thought that Cleveland State, Dayton, Temple, Minnesota and Miami (FL) were all good, top 100 RPI challenges. Unfortunately, not one of the challenges was met. It will take a better Zips team to be up for those challenges and produce at least a win or two. Until they reach that point, I see no value in overscheduling tough games the Zips have yet to prove they can handle. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roo Posted April 4, 2011 Report Share Posted April 4, 2011 I don't believe we should do the Miami strategy and play teams like Kansas, Ohio State, etc...etc... Those are almost sure fire losses and do nothing for the program. What we need to concentrate on doing is getting rid of games like Detroit, Bethune Cookman, Oral Roberts etc..etc.. Those games are worthless and do not make this team better. We need to add more games that compare to Temple, Dayton, Cleveland State, Xavier, etc.. Atlantic Ten should be a focus of our schedule because they are quality opponents and we should be able to get them to come to the JAR for a return game. Then we need to look at some of the middle to lower BCS teams like Penn State, Depaul, Miami FL, Vanderbilt etc..etc.. Lets stock pile our schedules with those type of teams. Splitting an OOC schedule parred with a strong conference performance should put us in the sub 75 RPI realm. The biggest thing is putting our program in winnable games but also being able to get some of those teams to come to Akron to help bolster attendance. I like to root for the Zips, but I am not going to the JAR to see them play Oral Roberts. It isn't happening. Not unless they renovate the JAR... There is no reason why we should be losing to poor programs like EMU like others have states. But I think it is fair to expect us to compete and even win against the likes of Dayton, Clevenland States, etcs... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
akronzips71 Posted April 4, 2011 Report Share Posted April 4, 2011 I think some of the Creighton fans had it right before we played them this year. What good program wants to risk losing to (ugh) Akron? IF we were VERY weak or VERY strong it would be attractive to top programs. As a better than mediocre team that can beat a big once in a while we are not that attractive an opponent. Beating us does NOTHING for them. Losing to us becomes an anchor that drags them down. IF we had beat ND at the dance, wow. They would have thought they were in the Twilight Zone. To ND, ranked #5 in the country, that game was all down side. They were SUPPOSED to beat us, so winning got them nothing more than advancement to the next game they were supposed to get anyway. Losing to us makes them the laughingstock of the dance. What WE need to do is get so good that top teams WANT to play us so they can say they beat us. That is where Butler is at right now. Win or lose tonite, they went to the finals two years in a row. They are a force. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spin Posted April 5, 2011 Report Share Posted April 5, 2011 A Mid-Major National Basketball Champ? So much for that idea. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
taxpayer Posted April 5, 2011 Report Share Posted April 5, 2011 My two cents on S.O.S.: I agree with the elimination of scheduling below D1; I'd also argue against scheduling more than 3 Top 25 programs as those would be away with no hope of a home and home. We are good enough that any Top 30 program isn't coming to the JAR. Since money is tight, schedule within a five hour bus. Who does that allow us to schedule with a possiblity of a home and home? Dayton, Duquesne & St. Bonaventure of the A10. Penn State, Northwestern, Indiana (currently) B10 Try to schedule 2 or 3 of the above per year. The other D1 programs within the 5 hour circle will demand we play in their barn with no return trip to ours. Sprinkle in one game a year with them if possible: Michigan, Michigan St, ND, OSU, Pitt, WVU, Xavier. That's 4 impressive games. MAC 16 games - win 12 OCC 12 games Big Boys 1 BCS Boys 3 - win 2 Locals 2 YSU & CSU - win 2 Low Tier D1 (2) win 2 In SeasonTournament - again against top 75 programs 3 games - win 1 Total Scheduled 28 games. I believe that's the NCAA maximum with 19 hoped for wins not counting the 3 or 4 MAC Tournament games or NCAA Championship games, optomistic but doable. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skip-zip Posted April 6, 2011 Author Report Share Posted April 6, 2011 I don't believe we should do the Miami strategy and play teams like Kansas, Ohio State, etc...etc... Those are almost sure fire losses and do nothing for the program. What we need to concentrate on doing is getting rid of games like Detroit, Bethune Cookman, Oral Roberts etc..etc.. Those games are worthless and do not make this team better. We need to add more games that compare to Temple, Dayton, Cleveland State, Xavier, etc.. Atlantic Ten should be a focus of our schedule because they are quality opponents and we should be able to get them to come to the JAR for a return game. Then we need to look at some of the middle to lower BCS teams like Penn State, Depaul, Miami FL, Vanderbilt etc..etc.. Lets stock pile our schedules with those type of teams. Splitting an OOC schedule parred with a strong conference performance should put us in the sub 75 RPI realm. The biggest thing is putting our program in winnable games but also being able to get some of those teams to come to Akron to help bolster attendance. I like to root for the Zips, but I am not going to the JAR to see them play Oral Roberts. It isn't happening. Not unless they renovate the JAR... There is no reason why we should be losing to poor programs like EMU like others have states. But I think it is fair to expect us to compete and even win against the likes of Dayton, Clevenland States, etcs... BINGO!! Number #75 in RPI would be a good goal. I don't care if it's 5 Top-25 teams, or 10 Top-50 teams on the schedule. Whatever it takes. What we're doing now isn't nearly good enough. Again, just look at the resumes of some of the last teams into the tournament every year. I'll refer back to my first post in this thread again. Winning mid-major programs are knocking off top programs. We're a good, competitive team that also has a winning mentality, but simply aren't giving ourselves enough of those same opportunities. We can also continue to debate forever about our schedule vs. Miami's schedule, but one thing is certain. Miami puts together a schedule that gives them 2 potential routes to the Big Dance, and we do not. I just don't see the sense in continuing to play a OOC schedule that virtually eliminates your chances of an at-large bid before the season even starts. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Captain Kangaroo Posted April 6, 2011 Report Share Posted April 6, 2011 I just don't see the sense in continuing to play a OOC schedule that virtually eliminates your chances of an at-large bid before the season even starts. Our OOC schedule last season was fine...we just lost all the games that mattered. BTW - Any talk of a Zips' at-large NCAA bid is valid with Zeke in his Junior and Senior seasons. If anyone says an at-large is not possible, they're a low-aimer. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave in Green Posted April 6, 2011 Report Share Posted April 6, 2011 Low aimer or realistic? While there's nothing at all wrong with being optimistic, high aimers might want to check the top six teams to be snubbed by the NCAA selection committee for this season's tournament. The Zips would have to exceed the accomplishments of these six teams in order to have a remote chance of being considered for an at-large bid next season. Note that one of the snubbed teams had an RPI of 44. 2011 NCAA Tournament Bracket Snubs Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Captain Kangaroo Posted April 6, 2011 Report Share Posted April 6, 2011 Low aimer or realistic? Low-aimer. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UAZipster0305 Posted April 6, 2011 Report Share Posted April 6, 2011 I just don't see the sense in continuing to play a OOC schedule that virtually eliminates your chances of an at-large bid before the season even starts. Our OOC schedule last season was fine...we just lost all the games that mattered. BTW - Any talk of a Zips' at-large NCAA bid is valid with Zeke in his Junior and Senior seasons. If anyone says an at-large is not possible, they're a low-aimer. +1. However, we can't lose to the MAC West teams or any weak OOC opponents, and we must win a game or two against a reputable OOC program. Based on this year's schedule, that puts us at roughly 23-10, no losses to EMU or NIU, and a win or two against CSU, Dayton, Minnesota, or Miami-FL going into the MAC Tournament. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BirdZip Posted April 7, 2011 Report Share Posted April 7, 2011 I just don't see the sense in continuing to play a OOC schedule that virtually eliminates your chances of an at-large bid before the season even starts. Our OOC schedule last season was fine...we just lost all the games that mattered. BTW - Any talk of a Zips' at-large NCAA bid is valid with Zeke in his Junior and Senior seasons. If anyone says an at-large is not possible, they're a low-aimer. +1. However, we can't lose to the MAC West teams or any weak OOC opponents, and we must win a game or two against a reputable OOC program. Based on this year's schedule, that puts us at roughly 23-10, no losses to EMU or NIU, and a win or two against CSU, Dayton, Minnesota, or Miami-FL going into the MAC Tournament. This past year VCU lost to South Florida (10-23), Georgia State (12-19) and Northeastern (11-20) and finished with an overall record (prior to tourney) of 23-11. They beat some good teams, but no ranked teams. They got in. We had our chances this year playing teams like Temple, Minnesota, Miami and Dayton. We need to win most of those. We didn't. Let's also not overlook that the rest of our conference is crap. We're not going to go undefeated in our conference, and losing to anyone in our conference is a crap loss. This year's schedule (OOC) was as good as VCU's. But they won theirs. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zippyman23 Posted April 7, 2011 Report Share Posted April 7, 2011 I just don't see the sense in continuing to play a OOC schedule that virtually eliminates your chances of an at-large bid before the season even starts. Our OOC schedule last season was fine...we just lost all the games that mattered. BTW - Any talk of a Zips' at-large NCAA bid is valid with Zeke in his Junior and Senior seasons. If anyone says an at-large is not possible, they're a low-aimer. It definitely was an improvement, but still would need to be better if we want to be serious about an at-large bid. Our OOC-SOS was 151st and the MAC drug that down to 180th overall. I think goal should be to have the OOC-SOS in at least the 50-75 range. Just dropping the bottom feeders for some average teams would likely get us under 100. Not too far off. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zipmeister Posted April 8, 2011 Report Share Posted April 8, 2011 Low aimer or realistic? While there's nothing at all wrong with being optimistic, high aimers might want to check the top six teams to be snubbed by the NCAA selection committee for this season's tournament. The Zips would have to exceed the accomplishments of these six teams in order to have a remote chance of being considered for an at-large bid next season. Note that one of the snubbed teams had an RPI of 44. 2011 NCAA Tournament Bracket Snubs Realistic (as opposed to either low aimer or flaming overly optimistic). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.