At Large Consideration

[originalrowdy]

...

Also a little disappointed that the Zips are not showing up in the bubble watch yet. Lots of teams with much higher RPI's are being mentioned but of course almost all of those are in the power conferences.

Agreed. Remind me again how a team that is getting T25 votes in both AP and Coaches isn't on the bubble watch? Clearly the weak SOS and bad loss to CC isn't enough for T25 consideration.

[akzipper]

I think the Drexel 11-12 comparison is a perfect example of why we won't get an at-large. Finished the regular season with 5 losses, long winning streak, lost in conference tournament. We will most likely have the same results, but that's the MAC. Pretty pathetic that CMU and Miami are just as likely to make the NCAA tournament as the Zips.

[zippy5]

Their RPI was 66. I know we don't like to let facts get in the way, but if we lose one game the rest of the way, we'll be in the 30s.

[ZachTheZip]

I think the Drexel 11-12 comparison is a perfect example of why we won't get an at-large. Finished the regular season with 5 losses, long winning streak, lost in conference tournament. We will most likely have the same results, but that's the MAC. Pretty pathetic that CMU and Miami are just as likely to make the NCAA tournament as the Zips.

We have played a significantly tougher schedule than Drexel did.

[Dave in Green]

Drexel's actual RPI at the time the NCAA selection committee was looking at them last year was only #70. Even worse, their SOS was a miserable #248. That was even cited by the selection committee as a reason why Drexel was passed over for an at large bid. By comparison, the Zips' RPI is already in the high 40s and continuing to climb, and the Zips' projected SOS is #157 -- both considerably better than Drexel's numbers last season. The scenario of the Zips winning out but losing in the MAC tournament championship game would also leave them with one less loss than Drexel had last season. So in every category, the Zips would be better positioned than Drexel was when the selection committee met last season. But the odds would still be against the Zips as there are a lot of teams right around the Zips' level fighting over only a few at large bids that are in play.

[Captain Kangaroo]

I will type the following for the benefit of those wondering: "Are people from Akron really that ignorant regarding college basketball?"

No. There are some who really do know what they're talking about. They just seem to get drowned-out by the din of the clueless.

The 2011-12 CAA was a much better conference than the 2012-13 MAC.

Drexel beat a 22-win ODU team, twice.

Drexel beat a 20-win Princeton team.

Drexel beat VCU

Drexel beat Cleveland State (whom the Zips could not beat in 2011-12).

If you dismiss Drexel's parallels to the 2011-12 Zips, you have no clue. If you dismiss making the CAA finals as some cake walk, you have no clue. If you dismiss beating VCU in 2011-12 you have no clue.

[Dave in Green]

Let's not go shooting at mirages. No one in this thread has suggested that we "dismiss Drexel's parallels" to the Zips. All the discussion has been about pointing out the parallels and the fine differences. Let's look at the facts. For example, the strength of the CAA last season should not be overestimated. That whole conference was down last season. In 2010-2011, the CAA's conference strength was ranked a healthy #10 in the country. But last season they were only ranked #15, barely above the #17 MAC. So the CAA pedigree didn't carry as much clout for Drexel as it would have in previous seasons when the CAA was much stronger. The weakness of the CAA last season helped contribute to Drexel's inferior RPI and SOS, along with a weak OOC SOS. The NCAA selection committee picked Iona over Drexel (even though Iona had one more loss) primarily due to Drexel's worse RPI and SOS.

This season, the MAC is once again ranked #17, slightly behind where the CAA was last season (#15). But the MAC East is ranked higher than the MAC West, and the Zips play 10 of their 16 conference games against the MAC East. So the Zips' actual conference RPI is right on top of where the CAA was last season. In the scenario of the win out but lose the MAC tournament championship game, the Zips would be ranked better in RPI, SOS and winning percentage than Drexel was last season. That could give the Zips a slightly better chance than Drexel depending on the final resumes of other bubble teams. It's still a long shot.

[Captain Kangaroo]

Let's not go shooting at mirages. No one in this thread has suggested that we "dismiss Drexel's parallels" to the Zips. All the discussion has been about pointing out the parallels and the fine differences. Let's look at the facts. For example, the strength of the CAA last season should not be overestimated. That whole conference was down last season. In 2010-2011, the CAA's conference strength was ranked a healthy #10 in the country. But last season they were only ranked #15, barely above the #17 MAC. So the CAA pedigree didn't carry as much clout for Drexel as it would have in previous seasons when the CAA was much stronger. The weakness of the CAA last season helped contribute to Drexel's lower RPI and SOS, along with a weak OOC SOS. The NCAA selection committee picked Iona over Drexel (even though Iona had one more loss) primarily due to Drexel's worse RPI and SOS.

This season, the MAC is once again ranked #17, slightly behind where the CAA was last season (#15). But the MAC East is ranked higher than the MAC West, and the Zips play 10 of their 16 conference games against the MAC East. So the Zips actual conference RPI is right on top of where the CAA was last season. In the scenario of the win out but lose the MAC tournament championship game, the Zips would be ranked better in RPI, SOS and winning percentage than Drexel was last season. That could give the Zips a slightly better chance than Drexel depending on the final resumes of other bubble teams. It's still a long shot.

SOS...RPI...it's all BS. The facts are well-stated.

Tell me DIG - Do the 2012-13 Zips play a significantly more difficult schedule (per Zach) than Drexel played in 2011-12? Yes or no?

I eagerly await what will be the shortest DIG post in history. Three or two characters. That's it.

[Dave in Green]

I can't speak for Zach's definition of "significantly more difficult schedule." What matters is the way the NCAA selection committee measures schedule difficulty, and that's by SOS. The Zips' SOS this season is better than Drexel's was last season. SOS -- especially OOC SOS -- is a fact of life with the NCAA selection committee. Learn to live with it.

[The Hip Zip]

it's all drivel... no more, no less. Drivel

[Captain Kangaroo]

I can't speak for Zach's definition of "significantly more difficult schedule." What matters is the way the NCAA selection committee measures schedule difficulty, and that's by SOS. The Zips' SOS this season is better than Drexel's was last season. SOS -- especially OOC SOS -- is a fact of life with the NCAA selection committee. Learn to live with it.

Only DIG could turn a 2-to-3 character response into 357. And still not answer the question.

[GoZips]

Simply put: Drexel's RPI was 67-70.

The NCAA selection committee never selects a team with that low an RPI UNLESS the team is in one of the

Power Six conferences.

The Zips RPI is in the 40s which gives rise to the genuine speculation that Akron could get an at-large bid; but,

it is a long shot. An awful lot depends on what high majors grab available at-large slots. The NCAA selection

committee is not champion of equality/fairness/or other blarney.

[Dave in Green]

I'm confident that the many thoughtful readers of this forum found my answer to be appropriate, in that it addressed the question of how the NCAA selection committee views schedule difficulty -- SOS. That's all that really matters to the Zips team, and that's all that should really matter to Zips fans. I don't disagree that SOS is an imperfect measure, just like RPI. But that's the system the NCAA uses. There was a really good analysis written last March on SB Nation of the selection committee's choice of Iona over Drexel, and how the flawed SOS metric played into that:

Why The Selection Committee Should Stop Using Non-Conference Strength of Schedule

[ZachTheZip]

Only DIG could turn a 2-to-3 character response into 357. And still not answer the question.

In the 2011-12 season, Drexel had a SOS of 233 going into Selection Sunday. Their non-conference SOS was ranked 213.

Using RPIForecast.com to factor in the NDSU game and future MAC games, Akron's SOS will be around 137. The non-conference SOS will be around 52.

[LZIp]

Didnt Andy Katz say the Zips should get an at-large if they go undefeated in conference play?

[skip-zip]

I went looking for some information about Drexel missing the tournament that year.

It appears that "not beating anyone noteworthy in non-conference play" is what is being listed as the cause.

Aren't we in the same boat?

You need to play good teams and beat good teams to get respect. If they aren't on our conference schedule, then we need to make sure that enough of those opportunities exist in our non-conference schedule.

Some will argue that our OOC schedule is "getting better". That's fine. Maybe it is. But, if it's not good enough to get a team with 5 losses into the Big Dance, then shame on us for not making it good enough to accomplish that.

[Hilltopper]

Some will argue that our OOC schedule is "getting better". That's fine. Maybe it is. But, if it's not good enough to get a team with 5 losses into the Big Dance, then shame on us for not making it good enough to accomplish that.

You are delusional if you think the coaching staff doesn't want to upgrade the OOC schedule too. The only way we could schedule enough good teams to overcome having to play the bottom feeders in the MAC is to go all Ark-PB. Play every OOC game on the road. If we can keep up this attendance trend, we might have enough money to buy some games against better competition.

[ZachTheZip]

Last year, Drexel's only top-100 RPI wins outside of conference play were home games vs. Princeton and Cleveland State. Sound familiar? Akron has that, plus a win vs MTSU. NDSU would be another top-100 win.

In conference play, Drexel beat VCU (38) once and George Mason (82) once for two top-100 wins. The rest of the conference teams' RPI were below 100. They also lost to VCU in the conference championship game. Akron's best two MAC wins are Ohio (74) and WMU (114).

Add it all together, and Drexel had: Princeton (89), CSU (85), George Mason (82), and VCU (38). They had three losses to 100+ RPI teams: Norfolk State (129), at Delaware (153), and at Georgia State (138).

Win out the regular season, and Akron has: NDSU (78), Ohio (74), Ohio (74), and MTSU (27). However, we only have one loss to a 100+ RPI team, Coastal Carolina (242) in the season opener.

[Dave in Green]

@skip-zip, I'm not sure what the source is of your information, but here's what the chair of the selection committee, Jeff Hathaway, said on national TV:

The most controversial at-large selection was made when Iona was selected into the field. The Gaels won the MAAC regular season title, but then lost in the conference tournament semifinals. Hathaway said on CBS that Iona's strength of schedule was what put the Gaels into the field.

Iona beat no one any more noteworthy than Drexel in non-conference play, and had a worse overall won-lost record. The focus should not be on why Drexel was excluded but why Iona was included. Examine Iona's body of work last season, including RPI and SOS, and it's much closer than Drexel's to the Zips' profile this season. Heck, Iona was 25-7 after they lost in their conference semi-final game. In the regular season they lost to #293 William and Mary and #224 Siena, and their best win was over #49 Nevada at home, comparable to the Zips home win over MTSU.

Plain and simple, Iona had a better SOS and RPI than Drexel, and the chair of the selection committee confirmed that's how Iona got its at large bid.

EDIT: Sorry, I left out another direct Hathaway quote:

He defended Iona, which many people feel took Drexel's spot. "Drexel was well over 200 in strength of schedule, while Iona had some very good top-100 wins. I think we got that one right," Hathaway said.

[skip-zip]

@skip-zip, I'm not sure what the source is of your information, but here's what the chair of the selection committee, Jeff Hathaway, said on national TV:

The most controversial at-large selection was made when Iona was selected into the field. The Gaels won the MAAC regular season title, but then lost in the conference tournament semifinals. Hathaway said on CBS that Iona's strength of schedule was what put the Gaels into the field.

Iona beat no one any more noteworthy than Drexel in non-conference play, and had a worse overall won-lost record. The focus should not be on why Drexel was excluded but why Iona was included. Examine Iona's body of work last season, including RPI and SOS, and it's much closer than Drexel's to the Zips' profile this season. Heck, Iona was 25-7 after they lost in their conference semi-final game. In the regular season they lost to #293 William and Mary and #224 Siena, and their best win was over #49 Nevada at home, comparable to the Zips home win over MTSU.

Plain and simple, Iona had a better SOS and RPI than Drexel, and the chair of the selection committee confirmed that's how Iona got its at large bid.

Dave,

My post had nothing to do with Iona, nor was I making an argument about Iona vs. Drexel. I was simply stating what appeared to be Drexel's downfall.

[Dave in Green]

@skip-zip, please see my edited post with Hathaway's direct Drexel/Iona quote that I accidentally left out.

[Dave in Green]

Here are Iona's top 100 wins from last season:

#49 Nevada (home)

#74 St Joe (home)

#78 Loyola (home)

#88 Long Island (home)

#93 Denver (away)

Here's how the Zips compare:

#28 MTSU (home)

#77 Ohio (home)

#77 Ohio (away)?

#82 NDSU (home)?

Obviously the whole deal is off if the Zips don't win those last two. But if WMU (currently #111) could have held on to their RPI in the 90s as it was when we played them, the Zips would have had an even better top 100 win profile than Iona did last season. As it is, the Zips have fewer bad losses than Iona did last season, and should have a better RPI and SOS as well if they win out up to the MAC tournament championship game.

[Captain Kangaroo]

Iona did not do us midmajors any favors when they bowed out in Round #1 last year (gagged on a 25-point lead).

Had Iona advanced a round or two, maybe the committee would be more apt to throw us a bone in 2013.

Hopefully, we won't need it.

I Trust in Tree.

[Hilltopper]

I Trust in Tree.

[johnnyzip84]

I haven't been able to follow ZnO as much lately, so forgive me if this point has been made already. Does the fact that this guy chairs the NCAA selection committee help or hinder the Zips chances?