kreed5120 Posted March 20 Report Share Posted March 20 (edited) On 3/20/2025 at 11:42 AM, ZipsBBjunkie said: You don’t need months, weeks or even days of planning to hop on a flight to Vegas or Florida from Cleveland these days. Maybe when it is Spring Break for all the local primary schools it would be a problem and certainly more pricey, but I’m sure the season ended in the semis and they figured they were done. Expand Yes, 6 or 7 years ago I had a friend who showed up at the airport and asked for a ticket to Vegas. He decided last minute to go and meet up with friends who already had a room and arrived in Vegas the day before. In my younger days, I remember getting a call from my cousin telling me he was jumping on a bus to NYC and asked if I wanted to come. I quickly threw some stuff in a bag and met up with him. I think some overestimate the amount of planning it takes to go on a trip. Particularly if you're just meeting up with people who already ironed out the logistics. Edited March 20 by kreed5120 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ewbrooman1 Posted March 20 Report Share Posted March 20 (edited) Spring break week for Can't was last week. Shouldn't they have stayed in town this week to attend classes? 😉 Edited March 20 by ewbrooman1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zippy5 Posted March 20 Report Share Posted March 20 Too much sticking up for Kent here imo 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LZIp Posted March 20 Report Share Posted March 20 As somebody else pointed out, the only "plus" Kent had over Miami this year was playing (and losing) to Alabama and Auburn, whereas Miami played and lost to Michigan and Indiana, which were good teams as well. Miami had a better overall record, better conference record, and obviously beat Kent 3 teams. If there is that much weight given to who you lose to in these ratings 1) there are clearly some serious flaws in them and 2) why wouldn't you schedule tough as hell in the OOC to game the system? Best case scenario, you *might* give yourself an at-large chance if you pull off a few upsets, you're better prepared for March Madness, and you give yourself a chance at better seed (therefore better matchup) if you win the conference tourney. Worst case scenario, it all comes down to 3 days in Cleveland like it always does, with the potential for getting a better seed due to losing to these good teams.. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
clarkwgriswold Posted March 20 Author Report Share Posted March 20 They took a private jet, using that Furman NIL money! 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zippy5 Posted March 20 Report Share Posted March 20 On 3/20/2025 at 1:27 PM, LZIp said: As somebody else pointed out, the only "plus" Kent had over Miami this year was playing (and losing) to Alabama and Auburn, whereas Miami played and lost to Michigan and Indiana, which were good teams as well. Miami had a better overall record, better conference record, and obviously beat Kent 3 teams. If there is that much weight given to who you lose to in these ratings 1) there are clearly some serious flaws in them and 2) why wouldn't you schedule tough as hell in the OOC to game the system? Best case scenario, you *might* give yourself an at-large chance if you pull off a few upsets, you're better prepared for March Madness, and you give yourself a chance at better seed (therefore better matchup) if you win the conference tourney. Worst case scenario, it all comes down to 3 days in Cleveland like it always does, with the potential for getting a better seed due to losing to these good teams.. Expand Who was better prepared for March? Last Friday tells me it was Miami Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
clarkwgriswold Posted March 20 Author Report Share Posted March 20 On 3/20/2025 at 2:16 PM, zippy5 said: Who was better prepared for March? Last Friday tells me it was Miami Expand Well, to be fair, PCCC was better prepared for Vegas. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kreed5120 Posted March 20 Report Share Posted March 20 (edited) On 3/20/2025 at 2:35 PM, clarkwgriswold said: Well, to be fair, PCCC was better prepared for Vegas. Expand Kenni Burns probably just needed a runner to place his March Madness bets. Edited March 20 by kreed5120 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Let'sGoZips94 Posted March 20 Report Share Posted March 20 Damn. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Let'sGoZips94 Posted March 20 Report Share Posted March 20 On 3/20/2025 at 1:17 PM, zippy5 said: Too much sticking up for Kent here imo Expand Amen. On 3/20/2025 at 1:27 PM, LZIp said: As somebody else pointed out, the only "plus" Kent had over Miami this year was playing (and losing) to Alabama and Auburn, whereas Miami played and lost to Michigan and Indiana, which were good teams as well. Miami had a better overall record, better conference record, and obviously beat Kent 3 teams. If there is that much weight given to who you lose to in these ratings 1) there are clearly some serious flaws in them and 2) why wouldn't you schedule tough as hell in the OOC to game the system? Best case scenario, you *might* give yourself an at-large chance if you pull off a few upsets, you're better prepared for March Madness, and you give yourself a chance at better seed (therefore better matchup) if you win the conference tourney. Worst case scenario, it all comes down to 3 days in Cleveland like it always does, with the potential for getting a better seed due to losing to these good teams.. Expand NET is corrupt. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zippy87 Posted March 20 Report Share Posted March 20 On 3/20/2025 at 3:36 PM, Let'sGoZips94 said: Damn. Expand I'm glad he is staying. It's good for the MAC and mid-major basketball in general. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Let'sGoZips94 Posted March 20 Report Share Posted March 20 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RoyalBlu Posted March 20 Report Share Posted March 20 It's not a matter of 'standing up for Kent.' It's a MAC thread, first off. And has been pointed out many times before, scheduling is huge for mid-majors, and in this case it paid off for Kent. Auburn-Alabama, Michigan-Indiana aside, check out the Mid-Major Top 25. It gives a solid clue to why Kent over Miami. You will see that Akron and Kent, by a wide margin, played more teams on that list (including others getting votes) than anyone else in the MAC did, including Miami. I doubt Kent went into the season - or even ended the season - thinking they were going to be a NIT team. But the 'lucky' reward was a NIT bid because of their scheduling. It validates what many have complained about MAC Basketball for years. Most MAC teams don't play anybody. It's not just getting a few P5s on the schedule, it's playing 5-6 other teams like yourself. You will likely lose your share. But if you win enough (Akron-Miami aside, Kent was 3-1 vs. other MM T-25+ teams) you could potentially get a reward. BTW - Miami and Kent aside, Akron was 1-3 vs. other MM T25+teams. Other than Akron-Kent, Miami did not play another team on the MM T-25+. Not always about wins and loses. But playing quality games. https://collegeinsider.com/mens-mid-major-top-25 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kreed5120 Posted March 20 Report Share Posted March 20 On 3/20/2025 at 8:06 PM, RoyalBlu said: It's not a matter of 'standing up for Kent.' It's a MAC thread, first off. And has been pointed out many times before, scheduling is huge for mid-majors, and in this case it paid off for Kent. Auburn-Alabama, Michigan-Indiana aside, check out the Mid-Major Top 25. It gives a solid clue to why Kent over Miami. You will see that Akron and Kent, by a wide margin, played more teams on that list (including others getting votes) than anyone else in the MAC did, including Miami. I doubt Kent went into the season - or even ended the season - thinking they were going to be a NIT team. But the 'lucky' reward was a NIT bid because of their scheduling. It validates what many have complained about MAC Basketball for years. Most MAC teams don't play anybody. It's not just getting a few P5s on the schedule, it's playing 5-6 other teams like yourself. You will likely lose your share. But if you win enough (Akron-Miami aside, Kent was 3-1 vs. other MM T-25+ teams) you could potentially get a reward. BTW - Miami and Kent aside, Akron was 1-3 vs. other MM T25+teams. Other than Akron-Kent, Miami did not play another team on the MM T-25+. Not always about wins and loses. But playing quality games. https://collegeinsider.com/mens-mid-major-top-25 Expand Yes, I'm not sure why some think just because this is an Akron forum that we can't engage in intelligent conversation. If I wanted to just troll, I'd go to X or Kent's sorry excuse for a fan forum. I take digs at Kent (see my Kenni Burns comment earlier), but other times I'm just trying to advance a in depth conversation. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Let'sGoZips94 Posted March 20 Report Share Posted March 20 On 3/20/2025 at 8:06 PM, RoyalBlu said: It's not a matter of 'standing up for Kent.' It's a MAC thread, first off. And has been pointed out many times before, scheduling is huge for mid-majors, and in this case it paid off for Kent. Auburn-Alabama, Michigan-Indiana aside, check out the Mid-Major Top 25. It gives a solid clue to why Kent over Miami. You will see that Akron and Kent, by a wide margin, played more teams on that list (including others getting votes) than anyone else in the MAC did, including Miami. I doubt Kent went into the season - or even ended the season - thinking they were going to be a NIT team. But the 'lucky' reward was a NIT bid because of their scheduling. It validates what many have complained about MAC Basketball for years. Most MAC teams don't play anybody. It's not just getting a few P5s on the schedule, it's playing 5-6 other teams like yourself. You will likely lose your share. But if you win enough (Akron-Miami aside, Kent was 3-1 vs. other MM T-25+ teams) you could potentially get a reward. BTW - Miami and Kent aside, Akron was 1-3 vs. other MM T25+teams. Other than Akron-Kent, Miami did not play another team on the MM T-25+. Not always about wins and loses. But playing quality games. https://collegeinsider.com/mens-mid-major-top-25 Expand This is an incredibly weak argument. I highly doubt beating Cleveland State & Towson in November had much - if anything - to do with them getting into the NIT. They were gifted the Arkansas State game as well (at home, mind you). They lost both their Q2 games, went 5-5 in Q3 games, and had 2 Q4 losses. For comparison, Miami OH was 1-2 in Q2 games, 5-2 in Q3 games (including a W against Troy who is in the NCAA Tourney), and had 3 Q4 losses. We've already established the NET advantage Kent had is due to their losses to Auburn, Bama, and UC Irvine. That's it. How did that prepare them? They got their asses whooped by Akron and Miami OH 5 times this season and went barely over .500 in a crap MAC this year. All you need to know about how "deserving" Kent is of their NIT bid is that two of their top players allegedly flew to party destinations within 2 days losing in the MAC semifinal. Oh, and citing the MM Top 25 is interesting considering Akron & Miami have consistently been listed, while Kent hasn't made an appearance since November/December, if at all. On 3/20/2025 at 8:15 PM, kreed5120 said: Yes, I'm not sure why some think just because this is an Akron forum that we can't engage in intelligent conversation. If I wanted to just troll, I'd go to X or Kent's sorry excuse for a fan forum. I take digs at Kent (see my Kenni Burns comment earlier), but other times I'm just trying to advance a in depth conversation. Expand Any sort of defense of Kent this season isn't intelligent. 0-5 vs. Akron/Miami, barely above .500 in a bad MAC, semifinals exist in the MAC tournament, and two of their top players flew to party destinations within days of losing in the MAC tourney. Their coach cried about Akron being the Yankees/Dodgers, then spouted off against Miami OH on Twitter. Unserious program. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kreed5120 Posted March 20 Report Share Posted March 20 On 3/20/2025 at 8:41 PM, Let'sGoZips94 said: This is an incredibly weak argument. I highly doubt beating Cleveland State & Towson in November had much - if anything - to do with them getting into the NIT. They were gifted the Arkansas State game as well (at home, mind you). They lost both their Q2 games, went 5-5 in Q3 games, and had 2 Q4 losses. For comparison, Miami OH was 1-2 in Q2 games, 5-2 in Q3 games (including a W against Troy who is in the NCAA Tourney), and had 3 Q4 losses. We've already established the NET advantage Kent had is due to their losses to Auburn, Bama, and UC Irvine. That's it. How did that prepare them? They got their asses whooped by Akron and Miami OH 5 times this season and went barely over .500 in a crap MAC this year. All you need to know about how "deserving" Kent is of their NIT bid is that two of their top players allegedly flew to party destinations within 2 days losing in the MAC semifinal. Oh, and citing the MM Top 25 is interesting considering Akron & Miami have consistently been listed, while Kent hasn't made an appearance since November/December, if at all. Any sort of defense of Kent this season isn't intelligent. 0-5 vs. Akron/Miami, barely above .500 in a bad MAC, semifinals exist in the MAC tournament, and two of their top players flew to party destinations within days of losing in the MAC tourney. Their coach cried about Akron being the Yankees/Dodgers, then spouted off against Miami OH on Twitter. Unserious program. Expand We've already been down this road. The NIT clearly stated what the criteria would be before the season even started (I can link you the press release) and they followed through on that. Complain about the NET, Kenpom, and whatever metrics you want, but that's what the NIT committee decided was important. They made that public knowledge, which is more transparency than we've ever seen in the selection process. Pretending to be shocked over something that was common knowledge is a waste of time to discuss. 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Let'sGoZips94 Posted March 20 Report Share Posted March 20 On 3/20/2025 at 9:02 PM, kreed5120 said: We've already been down this road. The NIT clearly stated what the criteria would be before the season even started (I can link you the press release) and they followed through on that. Complain about the NET, Kenpom, and whatever metrics you want, but that's what the NIT committee decided was important. They made that public knowledge, which is more transparency than we've ever seen in the selection process. Pretending to be shocked over something that was common knowledge is a waste of time to discuss. Expand The NIT's press release does not cover how the remainder of the field is selected outside of their main two categories (top 12 conferences and regular season conference champions with a KNIT of 125 or better). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RoyalBlu Posted March 20 Report Share Posted March 20 On 3/20/2025 at 9:17 PM, Let'sGoZips94 said: The NIT's press release does not cover how the remainder of the field is selected outside of their main two categories (top 12 conferences and regular season conference champions with a KNIT of 125 or better). Expand Did you read this in the press release .... The top teams from each conference will be determined based on the average of the teams’ ESPN Basketball Power Index (BPI), Kevin Pauga Index (KPI), NCAA Evaluation Tool (NET), Ken Pomeroy Rating (KenPom), Strength of Record (SOR), Torvik ranking and Wins Above Bubble (WAB) ranking. All rankings are already included in the “Team Sheets” used by the NIT Committee during the selection process. All teams receiving an exempt bid are guaranteed the opportunity to host a first-round game. In addition to the exempt teams, regular-season conference champions that are not otherwise selected to the NCAA championship can earn an automatic bid to the NIT as long as that regular-season champion has an average of 125 or better across the BPI, KPI, NET, KenPom, SOR, Torvik and WAB rankings. The rest of the 32-team field will be selected as at-large teams by the NIT Committee. It is understood, by most, that the at-large teams will be held to the same criteria as the exempt teams. When other teams back out, the metric average of 125 then became 126, 127, 128 and so on. Kent State was 128. I believe Miami was 147. As for the MM T-25. Speaking for myself, I'm saying these are the kind of teams you want to see more of on all MAC schedules. Akron played St. Mary's, Yale, Milwaukee and Arkansas State off the list, (and South Alabama was likely on the list when the Zips played them) plus 5 games vs. Kent and Miami. The rest of the MAC should do the same. BTW, Akron played Ark. St. as part of the Sun Belt Challenge based on Kenpom comparison. Kent played Ar. St. based on the same thing. One was on the road, one was at home. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Let'sGoZips94 Posted March 20 Report Share Posted March 20 I did read and what I didn't find was an explanation for how the remainder of the field is selected. "Understood by most" isn't transparency and San Jose State's inclusion proves the criteria isn't the end all be all. Totally agree that strong mid majors should be a scheduling target of MAC schools, but they had very little, if anything, to do with Kent's NIT bid. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kreed5120 Posted March 20 Report Share Posted March 20 (edited) On 3/20/2025 at 10:37 PM, Let'sGoZips94 said: I did read and what I didn't find was an explanation for how the remainder of the field is selected. "Understood by most" isn't transparency and San Jose State's inclusion proves the criteria isn't the end all be all. Totally agree that strong mid majors should be a scheduling target of MAC schools, but they had very little, if anything, to do with Kent's NIT bid. Expand San Jose State was an AQ. The Mountain West was a top 12 conference therefore had a guaranteed bid. Hence why San Jose State was given a 4 seed and hosted. The Mountain West teams that were better (by metrics) than San Jose State either choose to participate in another tournament (Boise State) or rejected competing in the NIT (UNLV & Nevada). The NIT kept going down the list of MWC teams until one said yes. That how they ended up in. Edited March 20 by kreed5120 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hilltopper Posted March 20 Report Share Posted March 20 On 3/20/2025 at 9:02 PM, kreed5120 said: We've already been down this road. The NIT clearly stated what the criteria would be before the season even started (I can link you the press release) and they followed through on that. Complain about the NET, Kenpom, and whatever metrics you want, but that's what the NIT committee decided was important. They made that public knowledge, which is more transparency than we've ever seen in the selection process. Pretending to be shocked over something that was common knowledge is a waste of time to discuss. Expand Don't hate the playa, hate the game. The only selection process used by the NIT was analytics. They made it clear before the season began. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zippy5 Posted March 21 Report Share Posted March 21 (edited) On 3/20/2025 at 10:26 PM, RoyalBlu said: Did you read this in the press release .... The top teams from each conference will be determined based on the average of the teams’ ESPN Basketball Power Index (BPI), Kevin Pauga Index (KPI), NCAA Evaluation Tool (NET), Ken Pomeroy Rating (KenPom), Strength of Record (SOR), Torvik ranking and Wins Above Bubble (WAB) ranking. All rankings are already included in the “Team Sheets” used by the NIT Committee during the selection process. All teams receiving an exempt bid are guaranteed the opportunity to host a first-round game. In addition to the exempt teams, regular-season conference champions that are not otherwise selected to the NCAA championship can earn an automatic bid to the NIT as long as that regular-season champion has an average of 125 or better across the BPI, KPI, NET, KenPom, SOR, Torvik and WAB rankings. The rest of the 32-team field will be selected as at-large teams by the NIT Committee. It is understood, by most, that the at-large teams will be held to the same criteria as the exempt teams. When other teams back out, the metric average of 125 then became 126, 127, 128 and so on. Kent State was 128. I believe Miami was 147. As for the MM T-25. Speaking for myself, I'm saying these are the kind of teams you want to see more of on all MAC schedules. Akron played St. Mary's, Yale, Milwaukee and Arkansas State off the list, (and South Alabama was likely on the list when the Zips played them) plus 5 games vs. Kent and Miami. The rest of the MAC should do the same. BTW, Akron played Ark. St. as part of the Sun Belt Challenge based on Kenpom comparison. Kent played Ar. St. based on the same thing. One was on the road, one was at home. Expand Did they take the highest ranked teams remaining based on those metrics? Edited March 21 by zippy5 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
clarkwgriswold Posted March 21 Author Report Share Posted March 21 If the quality of the teams you get thrashed by is indicative of the quality of your program, then Zips football is much better than I was led to believe! 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Let'sGoZips94 Posted March 21 Report Share Posted March 21 Apparently only Kam Craft felt the business was finished. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RoyalBlu Posted March 21 Report Share Posted March 21 (edited) On 3/21/2025 at 1:08 AM, zippy5 said: Did they take the highest ranked teams remaining based on those metrics? Expand Yes ... (Those that accepted the offer) in decending order. Kent was 128 Miami was 147 Several teams in between them were selected. Many teams above Kent declined the NIT ... or opted to play in another tournament. Edited March 21 by RoyalBlu 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.