akronzips71 Posted February 8, 2016 Report Share Posted February 8, 2016 http://www.ncaa.com/rankings/basketball-men/d1/ncaa-mens-basketball-rpi http://www.cbssports.com/collegebasketball/bracketology/nitty-gritty-report Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
akronzips71 Posted February 8, 2016 Author Report Share Posted February 8, 2016 And #46 in this one!!!!! http://realtimerpi.com/rpi_Men.html Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LoyalZIP Posted February 8, 2016 Report Share Posted February 8, 2016 Just keep winning. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
roopride Posted February 8, 2016 Report Share Posted February 8, 2016 Agree. Winning is what it takes. Nothing else. The other thing I like this year is no outside noise. Ben awhile since we can say that. Looks like a good group. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skip-zip Posted February 8, 2016 Report Share Posted February 8, 2016 I've been watching the RPI, as I have posted many times in recent weeks. It's not as high as this, but it's a good sign. I'm still figuring we have to get under #30 to lock up an at-large, but that's probably impossible with another loss. And I'm still not convinced that we can get through the next 8 games unscathed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zipnetter55 Posted February 8, 2016 Report Share Posted February 8, 2016 Iona is currently 12-9 and 2nd in the Metro Atlantic,with wins over Drexel,Marist, Manhattan and St.Peters,so our 14 pt win over them on a neutral court helps. UCSB is currently 9-11 and tied for 5th in the Big West and they have wins over Washington and Iona-don't know how much our 14 pt win over them helps. Looking at the remaining schedule,we will be favored in every game. Buffalo and NIU would appear to be the 2 biggest obstacles,but we get Buffalo at home and NIU has some ugly losses and is struggling. As for Cant,I have seen them twice and rivalry aside,we are the far superior team-their injuries hurt them and aside from Hall,they really don't have much scoring punch. I still believe we will run the table. GO ZIPS Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kreed5120 Posted February 8, 2016 Report Share Posted February 8, 2016 11 hours ago, zipnetter55 said: Iona is currently 12-9 and 2nd in the Metro Atlantic,with wins over Drexel,Marist, Manhattan and St.Peters,so our 14 pt win over them on a neutral court helps. UCSB is currently 9-11 and tied for 5th in the Big West and they have wins over Washington and Iona-don't know how much our 14 pt win over them helps. Don't forget Marshall is sitting at #3 in C-USA with a 8-3 conference record. We just need to keep winning to boost our potential March Madness seed. Right now Lunardi has us slotted as a 14th seed and facing MSU in round one. With a strong finish I feel a 10th or 11th seed is attainable, which would put us in a much better position to get our 1st March Madness win. It's fun to speculate about an at-large bid, but I don't want to put our tournaments hope in the hands of the selection committee. Odds are even if we did manage to pull off an at-large bid, we would get placed in one of those play-in games. Our goal should be to win the MAC tournament. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Let'sGoZips94 Posted February 8, 2016 Report Share Posted February 8, 2016 (edited) Not that it helps much with our RPI, but Villanova is the new #1 in the AP poll. It's nice to have them on our schedule. The ultimate goal is to win the MAC. I don't want to play 2nd fiddle to anyone in the MAC, but regardless of winning the MAC or not, if we get into the tournament I want as high a seed as possible. EDIT: Correction. According to Real Time RPI, Villanova is #1 in RPI, too. So that does affect us. Edited February 9, 2016 by lilroodude Correcting Facts 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
akronzips71 Posted February 8, 2016 Author Report Share Posted February 8, 2016 3 hours ago, lilroodude said: Not that it helps much with our RPI, but Villanova is the new #1 in the AP poll. It's nice to have them on our schedule. The ultimate goal is to win the MAC. I don't want to play 2nd fiddle to anyone in the MAC, but regardless of winning the MAC or not, if we get into the tournament I want as high a seed as possible. I think we would 'Nova a run for their money now. Big Dog and Williams were not playing then like they are today, and Robo is back. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
akronzips71 Posted February 9, 2016 Author Report Share Posted February 9, 2016 CBS has us at 44: http://www.cbssports.com/collegebasketball/rankings/rpi/index1 And KenPom at 75 LOL But we are approaching at large consideration rankings. Must keep winning. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zippy5 Posted February 10, 2016 Report Share Posted February 10, 2016 From RPI Forecast Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zippy5 Posted February 10, 2016 Report Share Posted February 10, 2016 Most likely ending up in the 20s, which would make for an interesting selection sunday should we falter in the MAC tourney Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skip-zip Posted February 10, 2016 Report Share Posted February 10, 2016 8 minutes ago, zippy5 said: Most likely ending up in the 20s, which would make for an interesting selection sunday should we falter in the MAC tourney With an RPI in the 20's, we'd definitely be IN. The question in your scenario would be....how much would a loss in the MAC tourney drop that number? ESPN's RPI has us at #44 after the win last night. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tpsjugglerdude Posted February 10, 2016 Report Share Posted February 10, 2016 12 minutes ago, skip-zip said: With an RPI in the 20's, we'd definitely be IN. The question in your scenario would be....how much would a loss in the MAC tourney drop that number? ESPN's RPI has us at #44 after the win last night. In 2006 Missouri Stat RPI #21 and Hofstra RPI #30 were left out. In 2007 #30 Air Force was also left out. What makes it interesting this year is that two tournament worthy teams will be sitting out this March (SMU, Louisville). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LZIp Posted February 10, 2016 Report Share Posted February 10, 2016 22 minutes ago, tpsjugglerdude said: In 2006 Missouri Stat RPI #21 and Hofstra RPI #30 were left out. In 2007 #30 Air Force was also left out. What makes it interesting this year is that two tournament worthy teams will be sitting out this March (SMU, Louisville). Indeed. If there is anything I've learned as a ZipsMBB fan though, its not to get your hopes up. Hopefully I'm proven wrong. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skip-zip Posted February 10, 2016 Report Share Posted February 10, 2016 I've been saying "Top 30" should get is IN, all along. So citing that there's been a #30, another #30, and a #21 who have not gotten a bid in the last 10 years is cause for concern? Three teams that got snubbed? How many teams in the 20's DID get in? About 100 or so? Sometimes, I think those who live on the side of "No MAC team will get an At-Large" even want to acknowledge any logical level of stature that would very likely results in a bid. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zippy5 Posted February 10, 2016 Report Share Posted February 10, 2016 1 hour ago, skip-zip said: With an RPI in the 20's, we'd definitely be IN. The question in your scenario would be....how much would a loss in the MAC tourney drop that number? ESPN's RPI has us at #44 after the win last night. Per RPI Wizard.. I ran a simulation where we beat WMU and KSU and lost to CMU, and that put us at a projected RPI of 32. I'd like to win 'em all and get into the top 20 for a nice seed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
morris buttermaker Posted February 10, 2016 Report Share Posted February 10, 2016 Getting in with an at large bid means nothing......it's time to win a game in the tourney. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tpsjugglerdude Posted February 10, 2016 Report Share Posted February 10, 2016 58 minutes ago, skip-zip said: I've been saying "Top 30" should get is IN, all along. So citing that there's been a #30, another #30, and a #21 who have not gotten a bid in the last 10 years is cause for concern? Three teams that got snubbed? How many teams in the 20's DID get in? About 100 or so? Sometimes, I think those who live on the side of "No MAC team will get an At-Large" even want to acknowledge any logical level of stature that would very likely results in a bid. Ok, let's look at last year. The #30 RPI team didn't get in with a 27-6 record. Why? Because their strength of schedule was 111. How far into the triple digits will our strength of schedule end up? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Let'sGoZips94 Posted February 10, 2016 Report Share Posted February 10, 2016 The thing about this discussion is winning the MAC tournament ends it. Win and you're in, no ifs, ands, or buts about it. And I like our chances (not to put the cart before the horse). Another aspect of this conversation that hasn't really been touched is the SoS debate. I know it has been beaten like a dead horse in other threads throughout the existence of ZipsNation, but if an RPI of around 30 or less doesn't get us an At-Large bid because of our SoS, would that possibly force KD's hand a bit more to give in and schedule tougher road games? Again, all speculation but it's interesting to discuss and I do enjoy being in a position to discuss it. Go Zips! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zippy_ua_00 Posted February 10, 2016 Report Share Posted February 10, 2016 how about we not worry about at at large bid and just win the whole damn thing. Win and we're in. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zippy5 Posted February 10, 2016 Report Share Posted February 10, 2016 Some of you guys are buzzkills. It'll never happen so don't even talk about it.. Blah blah blah. I think we're all in agreement that we'd rather win the MAC tourney and not worry about it, but what's the harm in speculating? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skip-zip Posted February 10, 2016 Report Share Posted February 10, 2016 Also, wouldn't a 2nd bid as an At Large say a lot about the increased level of respect from the committee? And the value to us, and every other MAC member, of having 2 teams recognized in the field from our conference? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
akronzips71 Posted February 10, 2016 Author Report Share Posted February 10, 2016 I think it is quite important to win the Mac regular season and secure the automatic NIT bid. That would be a powerful argument towards an at large. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RowdyZip Posted February 10, 2016 Report Share Posted February 10, 2016 17 minutes ago, skip-zip said: Also, wouldn't a 2nd bid as an At Large say a lot about the increased level of respect from the committee? And the value to us, and every other MAC member, of having 2 teams recognized in the field from our conference? I would love to see a MAC at-large. To me, the conference has improved to the point that it is deserved again. Unfortunately, the rest of the college basketball world doesn't see it that way. Akron is, without a doubt, the MAC's only chance this year (no matter how slim). We are set up for a chance here to get 3 or 4 top 100 wins (UB, OU, Knt 2x), and make our case. Let's hope we do it and maybe get a 10 or above seed. 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.