2024-25 Post Mortem and Looking Ahead to 2025-26

[kreed5120]

35 minutes ago, Let'sGoZips94 said:

Looks like we have our first Sun Belt matchup in place - James Madison. Nice home game for the schedule.

 

 

Spradlin did an excellent job last year in year 1 as their head coach. He inherited a 32 win team, but much of their roster was turned over. He still managed to lead them to a 13-5 conference record after an understandably slow OOC start. I haven't followed their offseason, but with a full year of recruiting I imagine they should be one of the better mid-majors this year. A nice home opponent for the schedule.

[ZipsFan31]

 

[kreed5120]

Season opener against JMU announced for November 3rd. Only 125 days away.

[RoyalBlu]

3 hours ago, kreed5120 said:

Season opener against JMU announced for November 3rd. Only 125 days away.

 

Seems like the better opponent, based on NET, would have been a return game by Ark. State (NET 94). Zips opened at Ark. State last season and lost in OT. Essentially would have been a 'home and home.' Nothing wrong with that. Would have added a little buzz for the opener, IMO.

 

JMU (NET 158) is not bad, considering Miami drew a dud in NET 293 Old Dominion. So it could have been worse.

 

But it also could have been much better.

 

[kreed5120]

15 minutes ago, RoyalBlu said:

 

Seems like the better opponent, based on NET, would have been a return game by Ark. State (NET 94). Zips opened at Ark. State last season and lost in OT. Essentially would have been a 'home and home.' Nothing wrong with that. Would have added a little buzz for the opener, IMO.

 

JMU (NET 158) is not bad, considering Miami drew a dud in NET 293 Old Dominion. So it could have been worse.

 

But it also could have been much better.

 

 

Looking at last seasons NET numbers is pointless, especially in this transfer era. Even Akron, which was much less impacted by the portal than many, is looking at 4 new starters in their lineup. It's very much going to be a different team compared to last season. Many mid-majors are turning over half their roster. 

 

From my understanding the first round teams are matched based off preseason expectations. That would mean expectations are that Old Dominion and JMU are projected to be 2 of the Sun Belts better teams. That doesn't necessarily mean that it will play out that way as preseason predictions are educated guesses. It's the 2nd round that uses NET to determine match-ups.

[Let'sGoZips94]

5 hours ago, kreed5120 said:

Season opener against JMU announced for November 3rd. Only 125 days away.

 

 

[Let'sGoZips94]

2 hours ago, RoyalBlu said:

 

Seems like the better opponent, based on NET, would have been a return game by Ark. State (NET 94). Zips opened at Ark. State last season and lost in OT. Essentially would have been a 'home and home.' Nothing wrong with that. Would have added a little buzz for the opener, IMO.

 

JMU (NET 158) is not bad, considering Miami drew a dud in NET 293 Old Dominion. So it could have been worse.

 

But it also could have been much better.

 

 

This is the single best matchup for the home game we could have gotten. Joe Akron knows who James Madison is (most likely) and that's more important for the home opponent than NET. 

[Let'sGoZips94]

Some great match-ups. 

 

JMU/Akron

Troy/PCCC

ODU/Miami OH

Ark St/Ohio

S Alabama/Toledo

Marshall/UMass

 

These conferences matchup so well. Great annual challenge - one of the few things Commish has done well. 

[RoyalBlu]

3 minutes ago, Let'sGoZips94 said:

Some great match-ups. 

 

JMU/Akron

Troy/PCCC

ODU/Miami OH

Ark St/Ohio

S Alabama/Toledo

Marshall/UMass

 

These conferences matchup so well. Great annual challenge - one of the few things Commish has done well. 

 

Personally, I'd swap Ark. St. and JMU ... plus Marshal and ODU. 

 

I see the argument for keeping JMU, somewhat, but the purpose of the challenge is best vs. best so a home and home rematch with Ark. State, with a chance to avenge that OT loss, is my preference. I'm also guessing, If I'm Miami, a game vs. Marshall would hold a lot more interest for multiple reasons than ODU ... as for UMass, as MAC rookies, who cares what team they draw. ODU should suit them just fine.

 

This looks like matchups were pulled out of a hat with no real thought at competitive pairings. The only teams with legit NET competitive pairings, in my mind, are S. Alabama-Toledo and Troy-Kent.

 

 

[Let'sGoZips94]

24 minutes ago, RoyalBlu said:

 

Personally, I'd swap Ark. St. and JMU ... plus Marshal and ODU. 

 

I see the argument for keeping JMU, somewhat, but the purpose of the challenge is best vs. best so a home and home rematch with Ark. State, with a chance to avenge that OT loss, is my preference. I'm also guessing, If I'm Miami, a game vs. Marshall would hold a lot more interest for multiple reasons than ODU ... as for UMass, as MAC rookies, who cares what team they draw. ODU should suit them just fine.

 

This looks like matchups were pulled out of a hat with no real thought at competitive pairings. The only teams with legit NET competitive pairings, in my mind, are S. Alabama-Toledo and Troy-Kent.

 

 

 

Did you know every single team in this challenge has the same NET ranking at this moment for 2025-26? 

 

JMU is one of the biggest mid major brands in college athletics at the moment. This is a very, very nice draw. 

Edited 4 hours ago by Let'sGoZips94

[ZipsFan31]

JMU is a good get. Brand is good and I bet they will be top 4 in that conference. 
 

Who else is coming to the JAR! I need to know lol 

[RoyalBlu]

15 minutes ago, Let'sGoZips94 said:

 

Did you know every single team in this challenge has the same NET ranking at this moment for 2025-26? 

 

JMU is one of the biggest mid major brands in college athletics at the moment. This is a very, very nice draw. 

 

As I understand it ... pairings are supposed to be based on projected NET rankings for the coming year. If that's true, then the schedule-makers expect one team to get a lot better and another to get a lot worse. As for 'name' recognition, I don't believe that figures into the NET rankings. While I certainly hope JMU ranks as a Net 125 team or better by the end of the season, not sure I'd bet on it. I will bet the Zips being NET 125 or better.

 

These folks better figure out how this game is being played; it's based on NET, not name. Just look down the road. Kent lucked into a NIT bid based on NET, over a MAC team that beat them three times and finished ahead of them in the standings. In a 1-bid league like the MAC, the NET still matters.

 

Edited 4 hours ago by RoyalBlu

[RoyalBlu]

Let me add this: I believe many would agree the NIT should take the best team from each conference. As I understand it, by the rules stated before last season, they decided to take the best team FROM EACH OF THE TOP 15 CONFERENCES, then the best at-large teams based on NET.

 

MY guess is they did it this way because so many P5 teams were opting not to play in the NIT. By using the NET, it opened the door for more mid-major teams  if they finished in the top NET 125 and did not make the NCAA Tournament. Since the MAC was not a Top 15 NET conference last season, the selection came down strictly to NET, not MAC.

 

Not saying that was fair. Just saying that was the rules.

 

Unless the NIT changes its process this season, the MAC can do two things.

 

1) Become a Top 15 NET conference. That way the likely hood is the MAC would get not 1 NIT team, but quite likely 2.

 

2) Have as many teams as possible finish NET 125 or better.

 

And the way to achieve No. 2 is play (and win) as many games as possible vs. NET 150 teams or better.

 

FYI -- Since the 2025 NIT Final Four ended up being all mid-majors; North Texas, UC Irvine, Loyola-Chicago and UT-Chattanooga -- if would not surprise me if the NIT changed their selection process again.

 

 

Edited 4 hours ago by RoyalBlu

[Let'sGoZips94]

21 minutes ago, RoyalBlu said:

 

As I understand it ... pairings are supposed to be based on projected NET rankings for the coming year. If that's true, then the schedule-makers expect one team to get a lot better and another to get a lot worse. As for 'name' recognition, I don't believe that figures into the NET rankings. While I certainly hope JMU ranks as a Net 125 team or better by the end of the season, not sure I'd bet on it. I will bet the Zips being NET 125 or better.

 

These folks better figure out how this game is being played; it's based on NET, not name. Just look down the road. Kent lucked into a NIT bid based on NET, over a MAC team that beat them three times and finished ahead of them in the standings. In a 1-bid league like the MAC, the NET still matters.

 

 

James Madison finished 158 in NET under a 1st year HC after their roster was decimated by the Portal. That's pretty damn good. Very valid to believe they will take a pretty sizable leap this year. Arkansas State has a new coach this year, so it's very valid to believe they will take a step backwards. I never said name recognition was a factor in the matchup, just that I'm happy with how this matchup came to fruition. The difference between any of the top 5-6 Sun Belt teams at home isn't that big of a deal because of how NET punishes home opponents. The bigger factor in NET is the road matchup in the Sun Belt Challenge and we have a long ways to go before that becomes a relevant discussion. 

 

Quadrant 1: Home 1-30, Neutral 1-50, Away 1-75.
Quadrant 2: Home 31-75, Neutral 51-100, Away 76-135.
Quadrant 3: Home 76-160, Neutral 101-200, Away 135-240.
Quadrant 4: Home 161-353, Neutral 201-353, Away 241-353.

 

Unless you're playing a team receiving Top 25 votes, you're likely facing a Q3 opponent at best at home. The Sun Belt NET does not matter for this home matchup, so give me the best name recognition possible to hopefully put more butts in seats and open some eyes of the general public with a win vs. a team they've heard of. 

[clarkwgriswold]

Oh no!

 

https://sports.yahoo.com/wnba/breaking-news/article/halftime-show-legend-red-panda-exits-wnba-commissioners-cup-final-in-wheelchair-after-fall-during-performance-013029334.html