At Large Consideration

[MontrealExposloveZippy]

We sit at 20-4 with 7 regular season games left-

If we reach 26-27 wins and lose the MAC Championship, is there a chance we get an at large bid, especially if we surpass Kansas' season winning streak of 18- We would technically be one of the "hottest/streaking" teams in the country and Akron is building a nice reputation as a "Sexy" pick for tourney nods

But then again sending 2 teams from the MAC seems highly irresponsible of the selection committee

[Zips fan]

I don't think our RPI can rise high enough to get an at large bid. If we win out(other than the championship game), we will need some help. We need to be a top 25 team and some national press on our streak. ESPN has us as a 13th seed currently. Usually the last at large teams are 12. We are close.

[ZachTheZip]

I don't think our RPI can rise high enough to get an at large bid. If we win out(other than the championship game), we will need some help. We need to be a top 25 team and some national press on our streak. ESPN has us as a 13th seed currently. Usually the last at large teams are 12. We are close.

If we win out the regular season, our RPi will be around 28. That's in the at-large range. If we only lose at Ohio, it will be around 35. Still a good shot there.

[Blue & Gold]

I think it has more to do with us staying a hot topic in the national media than us really deserving to be selected, should we lose the MACC.

We only have two signature wins on the year - OU & MTSU. Both at home; MTSU taking us to overtime @ the JAR. Losses to CCU & Detroit are killers. Creighton destroyed us.

Additionally, our winning streak, though nice, is probably fool's gold, as much of it has come against the MAC.

Posters here know I'm rarely negative, but we've been playing awful recently. Embarrassingly bad. We should have absolutely throttled both CMU & Miami. KD says we're going to be taking every team's best punch. Whatever. If we're as good as we say we are (National Championship, Rico?) CMU & Miami's best punches should be like my little sister hitting me. Instead, they almost knocked us out.

So I think keeping our name in the media is vital. Keeping the streak going will do that. I think it'd be almost impossible to keep us out if we went into the MACC game at, what, 28-4, no matter who the cupcakes we've devoured happen to be.

[akzipper]

Posters here know I'm rarely negative, but we've been playing awful recently. Embarrassingly bad. We should have absolutely throttled both CMU & Miami. KD says we're going to be taking every team's best punch. Whatever. If we're as good as we say we are (National Championship, Rico?) CMU & Miami's best punches should be like my little sister hitting me. Instead, they almost knocked us out.

Exactly how I feel. A tournament team would have won those game easy, by 20+. We play to the level of our competition. The Zips will never have that "killer instinct" teams like Gonzaga, Butler, and VCU have. Our players are more worried about winning in the tournament, when we have half the MAC regular season left to play. I still think it's very unlikely we win the MAC tournament. They need to worry about beating EMU now and not anything else. Stop talking and play the freaking game!

[akronzips71]

They seem to like teams with a "star" player. That is why OU has a real at large shot: DJ Cooper has a national rep.

We have Zeke, who is well known.

BUT

The X Factor here is Tree. On every ESPN telecast he gets a lot of talk. He is becoming more known, and has real star power. Like someone said, one of these days he is going to slap that ball so hard between his hands on a rebound it will pop.

A strong finish from Tree will help us get a shot. He is already being touted as a future "fringe" NBA prospect. This is only his third year of organized ball, and he keeps getting better.

Two "stars" would give us a better shot. It is not only about stats. It is also about general interest in the team and players.

[zen]

Keep talking like the zips can't get an at-large if they don't keep the streak going and win out. That's very tough. In any given game, a "better" team is upset. Just look at what's been happening to so many ranked teams lately for evidence of that.

Personally, I like Akron's chances to play well for two games in the Mac Tourney than to win out seven more additional games.

I'm not saying that an at-large is or isn't going to happen if the Zips complile a 27-5 record yet don't take the Mac championship, but I am not holding my breath for 7 more regular season games. If they come out for every game but don't take victories away from all of them, they still just have to win two in Cleveland. I feel good about that.

[Dave in Green]

If the Zips should win out except for a loss in the MAC championship game, they'd be 27-5 with a 23-game winning streak on their resume. They would have added top 100 wins over OU on the road and NDSU at home. They might also have added a top 100 win over WMU on a neutral court in the MAC semi-finals.

If all of that magic should come about, the Zips would be a bubble team waiting like all the other bubble teams to find out how many top-rated teams did not win their conference championships and needed to use up an at-large bid from the NCAA selection committee. It's possible the Zips might squeak in under those circumstances. But it would require a lot of things outside of the Zips' control to fall into alignment. On the other hand, the Zips control their own destiny by winning 2 games at the Q.

[ZachTheZip]

If the Zips should win out except for a loss in the MAC championship game, they'd be 27-5 with a 23-game winning streak on their resume. They would have added top 100 wins over OU on the road and NDSU at home. They might also have added a top 100 win over WMU on a neutral court in the MAC semi-finals.

If all of that magic should come about, the Zips would be a bubble team waiting like all the other bubble teams to find out how many top-rated teams did not win their conference championships and needed to use up an at-large bid from the NCAA selection committee. It's possible the Zips might squeak in under those circumstances. But it would require a lot of things outside of the Zips' control to fall into alignment. On the other hand, the Zips control their own destiny by winning 2 games at the Q.

RPIforecast.com says that if we win out, our RPI should be around 27. Add a win in the MAC semis and it would probably move up a few spots to 24 or 25. A loss in the championship game to top-100 Ohio puts us back to 30 at the very worst. An RPI of 30 is well within the at-large range. Safely within the bubble. We would also have a 23-game win streak, and likely be ranked heading into the MAC championship game.

If anybody thinks there's not a possibility to get an at-large, they're purposefully ignoring the math.

We 100% control our own destiny.

[skip-zip]

I don't think our RPI can rise high enough to get an at large bid.

That's the bottom line right now. Can we get into the Top-30 or so in RPI? Probably not. And if we can't get that high, people are going to be looking closely at our the Coastal Carolina loss, the Detroit loss, and the lack of any high profile wins.

Although, I am going to scream and yell anyway if they ignore us, if we end up with only 5 losses. But, there's still a heck of a lot of work to do for us to get to that point.

[ZachTheZip]

That's the bottom line right now. Can we get into the Top-30 or so in RPI? Probably not. And if we can't get that high, people are going to be looking closely at our the Coastal Carolina loss, the Detroit loss, and the lack of any high profile wins.

Although, I am going to scream and yell anyway if they ignore us, if we end up with only 5 losses. But, there's still a heck of a lot of work to do for us to get to that point.

Look at the forecast by final record..

We have to win out the regular season, but that would do it.

[lance99]

I'm not saying that an at-large is or isn't going to happen if the Zips compile a 27-5 record yet don't take the Mac championship, but I am not holding my breath for 7 more regular season games.

And you shouldn't. The Zips have been there before with that high win amount(2006-2007). Lost in the MAC tourney and got basically nothing for it. Yes I know there was the NIT, but for an at large, forget it. If I remember correctly, they lost on the road at Buffalo and that killed any change the had at a at-large bid. Looking at the team now, I see the same thing happening if they don't watch it.

[Dave in Green]

In 2006-2007, after the last-second upset by Miami in the MAC championship game, the Zips finished with a 26-7 record and an RPI of 68 -- way too low for NCAA at-large consideration.

[ZachTheZip]

In 2006-2007, after the last-second upset by Miami in the MAC championship game, the Zips finished with a 26-7 record and an RPI of 68 -- way too low for NCAA at-large consideration.

Our non-conference schedule was terrible that year. This year, we have a top-50 non-conference strength of schedule.

[MDZip]

In 2006-2007, after the last-second upset by Miami in the MAC championship game, the Zips finished with a 26-7 record and an RPI of 68 -- way too low for NCAA at-large consideration.

And that team didn't even the make the NIT, which was the real shame that year. While I certainly hope the Zips can get their RPI in the range for consideration, all I have to say is Missouri State - 21, which was what their RPI was when they were not selected to the tournament in 2006. I think it was a lack of high profile wins that did them in. Anyway, an RPI in the 20's is still no guarantee.

[Dave in Green]

The 2005-2006 Missouri State season record was 22-9, and their RPI was an aberration. That was the era when the Missouri Valley Conference got together and decided to game the RPI system to optimize their conference numbers. Here's how the top 6 teams in the MVC ended up in RPI that season:

#20 - Wichita State

#21 - Missouri State

#24 - Bradley

#35 - Northern Iowa

#37 - Southern Illinois

#45 - Creighton

Those teams were all pretty good, but not as good as the RPI numbers alone would suggest. Each of those teams played each other 2 or 3 times (counting their conference tournament), which really inflated each others' RPI. The NCAA selection committee spent a long time dissecting what had happened there before deciding not to give an at-large bid to Missouri State. As a result, the NCAA modified the RPI formula and puts more weight on factors other than RPI.

[ZachTheZip]

The 2005-2006 Missouri State season record was 22-9, and their RPI was an aberration. That was the era when the Missouri Valley Conference got together and decided to game the RPI system to optimize their conference numbers. Here's how the top 6 teams in the MVC ended up in RPI that season:

#20 - Wichita State

#21 - Missouri State

#24 - Bradley

#35 - Northern Iowa

#37 - Southern Illinois

#45 - Creighton

Those teams were all pretty good, but not as good as the RPI numbers alone would suggest. Each of those teams played each other 2 or 3 times (counting their conference tournament), which really inflated each others' RPI. The NCAA selection committee spent a long time dissecting what had happened there before deciding not to give an at-large bid to Missouri State. As a result, the NCAA modified the RPI formula and puts more weight on factors other than RPI.

That was what sparked the change to give additional weight (120%) to road wins and less to home wins (80%) in the RPI.

Ther MVC figured out that since a road win and home win counted the same, and that they all played each other, they could feast on a bunch of cupcakes and mid-level midmajors at home, then count on playing each other to boost their RPI, because it meant that they would be playing a bunch of conference teams with huge win totals.

This was also the formula that the major conferences had been using for years. It was perfectly fine then, but as soon as the MVC crashed the party, they had to change things up.

[bUAkronG]

Those of you who are freaking out about the Coastal Carolina loss might want to think again. I was watching the St John's vs Syracuse game today and one of the announcers mentioned about how Miami could possibly receive a 1 seed in the NCAA tourney. The other announcer cited the fact that they have losses to Florida Gulf Coast and Indiana State(pardon me if those two are wrong). The first announcer said that it shouldn't matter since that was early in the season and they were missing one of their star players, and that improvement should play into seeding. Now I know that seeding is different than an at–large bid, but let's not forget that the CC game was the first game of the year and we lost in overtime without two very solid players in Tree and Harney.

[odhgibo]

Our non-conference schedule was terrible that year. This year, we have a top-50 non-conference strength of schedule.

The MAC is too weak this year to merit two teams, even if one other than the conference champ has an 80%+ winning percentage. The conference has dropped 4-6 spots in comparative rankings since 2002 and, unfortunately, is now about on par with the OVC.

I'm not happy about it, but I also don't want to be unrealistic. Focus on being ready for the Q.

BTW, is anyone else wishing that the MAC would go back to a pure tournament format where Akron's deeper bench was a real advantage by the time Saturday night came around?

[OZoner]

The MAC is too weak this year to merit two teams, even if one other than the conference champ has an 80%+ winning percentage. The conference has dropped 4-6 spots in comparative rankings since 2002 and, unfortunately, is now about on par with the OVC.

The committee judges teams, not conferences. Murray State would've been an at-large team last year out of the OVC.

[RootforRoo44]

RPIforecast.com says that if we win out, our RPI should be around 27. Add a win in the MAC semis and it would probably move up a few spots to 24 or 25. A loss in the championship game to top-100 Ohio puts us back to 30 at the very worst. An RPI of 30 is well within the at-large range. Safely within the bubble. We would also have a 23-game win streak, and likely be ranked heading into the MAC championship game.

If anybody thinks there's not a possibility to get an at-large, they're purposefully ignoring the math.

We 100% control our own destiny.

I agree. This talk of us not getting an at-large with a 25-game winning streak under our belts is borderline insane.

We are 100% in with a 25 game win streak (that was only just snapped) and a top 30 RPI. Hell, we'd be ranked at the time of selection too. I mean, come on people.

But that's all hypothetical of course. We're a long way from 25 straight games.

[Captain Kangaroo]

I agree. This talk of us not getting an at-large with a 25-game winning streak under our belts is borderline insane.

We are 100% in with a 25 game win streak (that was only just snapped) and a top 30 RPI. Hell, we'd be ranked at the time of selection too. I mean, come on people.

We will not get an at-large if we lose to OU in the finals, regardless of the win streak.

Look at Drexel 2011-12. They'd won something like 24 of 25 going into their final game against VCU. They lost to VCU by 3 points, and subsequently ended up in the NIT. Drexel's 2011-12 schedule was exponentially tougher than the Zips 2012-13 schedule.

Eeking out games against Miami and CMU doesn't impress anyone. Nor should it.

We need to beat OU in the finals to make the tourney. And we need amped-up guard play if we're going to win any NCAA tourney games.

[Dave in Green]

Drexel's RPI in 2011-2012 was a modest #63.

[Blue & Gold]

Honestly, I think both UA & OU are without-a-doubt NCAA-quality & deserving teams.

It's just a shame the rest of the conference is so weak.

[GP1]

Before I post, one question. Does the runner up MAC school get automatic NIT?