Tourney (MAC and NCAA) picture

[skip-zip]

36 minutes ago, ace said:

Because of media exposure and because of Monmouth's perception earlier in the year. They were "giant killers" and that reputation had stayed with them whether it is still accurate or not. If you look at the body of work you'd see that Akron and Monmouth are close in resume strength but Monmouth certainly has a stronger perception from fans.

 

If you're right about "perception", then we are clearly missing the boat on the biggest opportunity to make an impression, with our lack of opportunities for higher impact wins.  I've already been on the "need a better OOC schedule" bandwagon forever anyway.  But, if a couple of wins against 50 RPI teams trumps your entire performance, I'd be shocked. 

 

But, I'm talking about the committee venturing from their normal protocol of giving "name teams" with traveling attendance potential the priority.  And Monmouth clearly doesn't fit that profile.   No-name teams with 70 RPI's are not getting into the NCAA tournament. 

 

And I'm sorry.  If we're talking RESUME in the same context, meaning overall beginning to end performance, How do you compare a 30-ish RPI to a 70-ish RPI, or a difference of 70 in SOS?  And losing TWICE to a team we've beaten as the only direct comparison. 

 

 

Edited March 8, 2016 by skip-zip
edit

[NWAkron]

They drew attention to themselves with some decent wins and the bench antics. That is all planned to create the meme in the media.  Marketing.   Hurley's and Groces sideline antics were as much or more about marketing (themselves) than motivating the team.  (I'm ready for the slap down).  And Monmouth has the coach with the "million dollar smile."

[zippy5]

I've spelled it out. No one on the committee gives a flying **** that our RPI is higher because we beat up on MAC teams while they beat up on MAAC teams. Their conference schedule sucks, ours sucks too, just a little less. That doesn't mean our resume is better, just that we gamed the system a little better. It's why they don't really look at RPI anymore

Edited March 8, 2016 by zippy5

[dre22era]

10 minutes ago, zippy5 said:

I've spelled it out. No one on the committee gives a flying **** that our RPI is higher because we beat up on MAC teams while they beat up on MAAC teams. Their conference schedule sucks, ours sucks too, just a little less. That doesn't mean our resume is better, just that we gamed the system a little better. It's why they don't really look at RPI anymore

Bingo

[kreed5120]

16 minutes ago, zippy5 said:

I've spelled it out. No one on the committee gives a flying **** that our RPI is higher because we beat up on MAC teams while they beat up on MAAC teams. Their conference schedule sucks, ours sucks too, just a LOT less.

FTFY

 

You are trying to compare the #20 rated conference to the #10 rated conference and say it's just a little better. Miami has the worst RPI in the entire MAC and that would be 5th best in MAAC. People give Akron crap for scheduling a handful or so of cupcakes OOC even though they played teams like Villanova (potential #1 seed), Green Bay (who is in the Horizon final), Iona (who won the MAAC), Marshall (who is a #3 seed in CUSA), and UCSB (who enters Big West as #4 seed), and Arkansas. Monmouth played over half their season against nothing but cupcakes.

Edited March 8, 2016 by kreed5120

[skip-zip]

18 minutes ago, zippy5 said:

I've spelled it out. No one on the committee gives a flying **** that our RPI is higher because we beat up on MAC teams while they beat up on MAAC teams. Their conference schedule sucks, ours sucks too, just a little less. That doesn't mean our resume is better, just that we gamed the system a little better. It's why they don't really look at RPI anymore

 

Zippy 5.....I love some of your posts, but I still think you are missing the point. 

 

If I were to summarize everything you've thrown out here, it looks like you are saying that a far superior RPI shouldn't matter, A much higher SOS shouldn't matter, the fact that we've beaten the ONLY common opponent that they've lost to....TWICE...doesn't matter either.   But....the "dancing bench" they have gives them an edge over us?  You believe that's what the committee sees that would make them superior to Akron?

Edited March 8, 2016 by skip-zip
edit

[kreed5120]

It should be noted that USC plays UCLA round 1 of PAC-10 tourney. This means Monmouth will be losing one of their top 50 wins or 1 of their top 100 wins.

[zippy5]

9 minutes ago, skip-zip said:

But....the "dancing bench" they have gives them an edge over us?  You believe that's what the committee sees that would make them superior to Akron?

Seriously? I've made it clear that the committee values their top 50 wins more. We barely have top 100 wins. Do I agree with it? Not sure, but it is what it is.

[kreed5120]

11 minutes ago, zippy5 said:

Seriously? I've made it clear that the committee values their top 50 wins more. We barely have top 100 wins. Do I agree with it? Not sure, but it is what it is.

 

We have just as many top 100 wins as they do with the possibility of adding 3 more if we meet up with Buffalo in the finals. If we meet up with OU, our 2 top 80 wins turn into 3 top 60-70 wins.

Edited March 8, 2016 by kreed5120

[NWAkron]

Wonder if they are discussing us on the Monmouth boards?

[zippy5]

8 minutes ago, kreed5120 said:

 

We have just as many top 100 wins as they do with the possibility of adding 3 more if we meet up with Buffalo in the finals. If we meet up with OU, our 2 top 80 wins turn into 3 top 60-70 wins.

That's great. And personally, I think that we're a better team. But I don't get to decide.

[GJGood]

Every year we hear that mid-majors need to schedule tougher OOC and win some of those games. Since Monmouth went out and did that I don't have a huge problem with them getting into the Big Dance, although their bad losses should not allow them too great of a seed. I don't see it as an Akron vs. Monmouth comparison issue. To me I'd rather see Monmouth than Michigan, Florida, or Vanderbilt who are all being touted as "on the bubble" despite finishing deep in their own conference standings. Yes, they play tougher schedules than mid-majors but what about finishing 6th in your own conference should allow to try to finish first in the nation? .

 

Where the Zips are concerned, I just don't understand why Akron doesn't even seem to be in the conversation even now that so many conference #1 seeds have gone down early in their own league tournaments. I haven't even heard one 'expert' say Akron is one the bubble but likely out, nobody has the Zips on the bubble at all despite an RPI in the 30s and winning the 10th toughest conference, out of 32, by two full games.

[kreed5120]

8 minutes ago, GJGood said:

Where the Zips are concerned, I just don't understand why Akron doesn't even seem to be in the conversation even now that so many conference #1 seeds have gone down early in their own league tournaments. I haven't even heard one 'expert' say Akron is one the bubble but likely out, nobody has the Zips on the bubble at all despite an RPI in the 30s and winning the 10th toughest conference, out of 32, by two full games.

 

I feel Akron's issue is they haven't had that win that captured everyone's attention. If they go onto win the MAC, I feel you will see a lot of pundits come out of the woodwork between Sunday and Wednesday making them a trendy 12 over 5 or, if lucky, 11 over 6 pick. Personally I'm ok if teams and the media sleep on Akron as we might be able to catch some team off guard, but I want the selection committee to not dick us over on seeding.

[skip-zip]

Our RPI just moved up to #33

[LZIp]

Well it looks like Green Bay is going to win the Horizon League tournament.

[The Hip Zip]

So tired already of Joe (3 chin) LOONardi......

 

Fantastic job by First year coach Linc Darner at GB.

[LZIp]

Looks like Gonzaga is going to get in and steal a spot.

[akronzips71]

Here is what I think you are missing:

The MAAC is a Metro NYC area conference.

It gets a ton of play in the press.

It has a hoops tradition going back to when the NIT was the king of tournaments.

 

While it is an "inferior" conference to the MAC, for many it is a "name brand" conference. With schools with a strong basketball name recognition: Siena. Niagara. Canisius. Manhattan College. Rider. Marist. St. Peters. I recall even back in the 1950's and '60 those schools and scores were ALWAYS announced on the radio news.

 

These are NAME BRAND schools in the biggest media market in the world.

 

So the conference gets notice. As opposed to the MAC, which has such luminaries as EMU, NIU and Ohios Polytechnic University.

 

So lets be real here: Football won a Bowl Game. Hoops has the auto NIT bid and a clear path to the Dance. Soccer won a National Championship. Baseball, well thanks Mr. President for the screwing.

 

But for Akron to have a shot at an at large pick in the Dance, we need to be in a BETTER conference. The MAC just stinks. It gets no respect.

[kreed5120]

I don't feel Akron is an at-large team. I'm not 

35 minutes ago, akronzips71 said:

Here is what I think you are missing:

The MAAC is a Metro NYC area conference.

It gets a ton of play in the press.

It has a hoops tradition going back to when the NIT was the king of tournaments.

 

While it is an "inferior" conference to the MAC, for many it is a "name brand" conference. With schools with a strong basketball name recognition: Siena. Niagara. Canisius. Manhattan College. Rider. Marist. St. Peters. I recall even back in the 1950's and '60 those schools and scores were ALWAYS announced on the radio news.

 

These are NAME BRAND schools in the biggest media market in the world.

 

So the conference gets notice. As opposed to the MAC, which has such luminaries as EMU, NIU and Ohios Polytechnic University.

 

So lets be real here: Football won a Bowl Game. Hoops has the auto NIT bid and a clear path to the Dance. Soccer won a National Championship. Baseball, well thanks Mr. President for the screwing.

 

But for Akron to have a shot at an at large pick in the Dance, we need to be in a BETTER conference. The MAC just stinks. It gets no respect.

I don't feel Akron is an at-large team. I also don't feel Monmouth is one neither. The MAC will be given an at-large team when it has a team deserving of one. The issue is in the rare instance over the 15 years a team was perhaps in position to be at-large caliber team they went on to win the MAC tournament making the discussion mute. Had Akron had 2 fewer losses, they would IMO almost certainly be an at-large team if they lost in the finals.

 

On another note that Gonzaga win adds another bid to the WCC total hindering Monmouth odds further.

Edited March 9, 2016 by kreed5120

[ZippyRulz]

14 hours ago, NWAkron said:

Wonder if they are discussing us on the Monmouth boards?

 

I wonder if Monmouth has a message board?

 

[skip-zip]

7 hours ago, kreed5120 said:

I don't feel Akron is an at-large team. I also don't feel Monmouth is one neither. The MAC will be given an at-large team when it has a team deserving of one. The issue is in the rare instance over the 15 years a team was perhaps in position to be at-large caliber team they went on to win the MAC tournament making the discussion mute. Had Akron had 2 fewer losses, they would IMO almost certainly be an at-large team if they lost in the finals.

 

Kreed.  This is pretty good.  I think you are right on. 

 

Yes, probably somewhere in the neighborhood of 2 wins short. We don't know for sure, but we'll see where we finish in RPI, and possibly be able to figure where we could have finished with two more wins, and who else got in that might have had a similar ranking. 

[Dr Z]

"This year, I don't think the MAC will even get an NIT bid," said Steve Mix (basketball analyst for SportsTime Ohio.)

[Hilltopper]

5 minutes ago, Dr Z said:

"This year, I don't think the MAC will even get an NIT bid," said Steve Mix (basketball analyst for SportsTime Ohio.)

I'm pretty sure he meant if Akron wins the MAC tourney, no other MAC team will get an NIT bid.

[Dr Z]

14 minutes ago, Hilltopper said:

I'm pretty sure he meant if Akron wins the MAC tourney, no other MAC team will get an NIT bid.

Yes. If you read the article, the one sentence I pasted implies exactly that. Good article btw. 

[kreed5120]

I'd agree Akron likely is the MACs lone option to make the NIT. The NIT field is quickly shrinking. Right now we have 11 teams that won their regular season, but lost the tournament. Of those I feel Saint Mary's and Wichita State are the lone teams that will get an at-large. That leaves 23 at-large selections remaining and with several 1 bid conferences yet to play their final, that number will likely continue to shrink.

 

The MAC strength this year was in its depth. It wasn't top heavy with a few dominant teams at the top. I do believe Akron did enough to warrant a NIT bid regardless of their conference regular season title making them automatically in the field, and I think that will be reflected in their seeding if I they fail to make it to the big dance.