MAC 2025-26 SZN

[UAZipster0305]

With their loss, Miami has fallen to #93 in Pomeroy (between #92 30-4 High Point and #94 13-20 Pitt) and #64 (from #54) in NET. I still don't think they make the NCAAT.

[kreed5120]

1 hour ago, UAZipster0305 said:

With their loss, Miami has fallen to #93 in Pomeroy (between #92 30-4 High Point and #94 13-20 Pitt) and #64 (from #54) in NET. I still don't think they make the NCAAT.

 

It seems every year the committee has a new metric, but what I've been reading is the committee uses WAB to select at-large teams then uses the predictive metrics like NET to seed them. Miami is currently #37 in WAB. That to me points they would make the field, but likely play in Dayton.

 

Of note, Akron is currently at #58 in WAB with a score of -0.99. By that metric the committee is estimating that a bubble team would have 1 fewer less than us if they played our exact same schedule. Meaning had Akron had 1 fewer loss right now we would be on the bubble, but in reality would probably need 2 fewer losses right now to be a serious final 4 candidate.

[UAZipster0305]

5 minutes ago, kreed5120 said:

 

It seems every year the committee has a new metric, but what I've been reading is the committee uses WAB to select at-large teams then uses the predictive metrics like NET to seed them. Miami is currently #37 in WAB. That to me points they would make the field, but likely play in Dayton.

 

Of note, Akron is currently at #58 in WAB with a score of -0.99. By that metric the committee is estimating that a bubble team would have 1 fewer less than us if they played our exact same schedule. Meaning had Akron had 1 fewer loss right now we would be on the bubble, but in reality would probably need 2 fewer losses right now to be a serious final 4 candidate.

That makes sense. Thanks for sharing.

 

However, I find the WAB metric to be highly unreliable because if Miami had our schedule (played at Purdue, vs. Yale, vs. Murray State, at Troy, and at our place), they'd have at least 3-4 losses, and they would not be anywhere near the bubble. Conversely, if we had their schedule, we'd have one loss or less as well.

 

All I get out of that is that it is highly beneficial to schedule as weak of an OOC schedule as possible to rack up wins and then buckle down in the MAC part of the schedule.

[kreed5120]

11 minutes ago, UAZipster0305 said:

That makes sense. Thanks for sharing.

 

However, I find the WAB metric to be highly unreliable because if Miami had our schedule (played at Purdue, vs. Yale, vs. Murray State, at Troy, and at our place), they'd have at least 3-4 losses, and they would not be anywhere near the bubble. Conversely, if we had their schedule, we'd have one loss or less as well.

 

All I get out of that is that it is highly beneficial to schedule as weak of an OOC schedule as possible to rack up wins and then buckle down in the MAC part of the schedule.

 

I feel it's impossible to project that. The only loss you can really guarantee for them from our schedule is Purdue. Murray State, Yale, and Troy were all winnable games for us. In fact, we were favored in all 3 contests. It's very conceivable they could have beaten those teams listed.

 

Also, this is the first season in I don't know how long that we didn't have a head stretching loss. Normally we lose to a NIU, Milwaukee, or Princeton who we had no business losing to. It's extremely challenging to win 28 games against D1 opponents in the regular season.

 

All metrics have flaws. That's probably why they keep continuing to build new ones. There is no perfect way when you have ~350 teams competing for 68 spots, but each team only plays 31 regular season games.

Edited 12 hours ago by kreed5120

[kreed5120]

Doug Gottlieb said a MAC team reached out to him to gage his interest in an opening. He said he wasn't interested. Given the vacancies currently available I can't really blame him.

[UAZipster0305]

32 minutes ago, kreed5120 said:

 

I feel it's impossible to project that. The only loss you can really guarantee for them from our schedule is Purdue. Murray State, Yale, and Troy were all winnable games for us. In fact, we were favored in all 3 contests. It's very conceivable they could have beaten those teams listed.

 

Also, this is the first season in I don't know how long that we didn't have a head stretching loss. Normally we lose to a NIU, Milwaukee, or Princeton who we had no business losing to. It's extremely challenging to win 28 games against D1 opponents in the regular season.

 

All metrics have flaws. That's probably why they keep continuing to build new ones. There is no perfect way when you have ~350 teams competing for 68 spots, but each team only plays 31 regular season games.

You say it's impossible to project that while relying on the WAB metric to say that Miami is worthy. What I am saying that if that is valid, the opposite should be too, but it is not applied that way, which makes zero sense.

 

I am also saying is that if the OOC schedule is essentially a bunch of scrimmages like Miami's, the team only really has to focus on the MAC schedule. In that regard, we have played the MAC schedule as well as they have. If our match up was in Akron, they likely would have lost and the MAC roles would have been reversed.

 

Overall, there are virtually no differences between our results and quality of our team as compared to Miami. We aren't getting any at large talk, and they shouldn't either.

Edited 12 hours ago by UAZipster0305

[kreed5120]

5 minutes ago, UAZipster0305 said:

You say it's impossible to project that while relying on the WAB metric to say that Miami is worthy. What I am saying that if that is valid, the opposite should be too, but it is not applied that way, which makes zero sense.

 

I am also saying is that if the OOC schedule is essentially a bunch of scrimmages like Miami's, the team only really has to focus on the MAC schedule. In that regard, we have played the MAC schedule as well as they have. If our match up was in Akron, they likely would have lost and the MAC roles would have been reversed.

 

Overall, there are virtually no differences between our results and quality of our team as compared to Miami. We aren't getting any at large talk, and they shouldn't either.

 

I'm not relying on anything. I simply stated from what I've read it's something the committee utilizes. I'm not on the committee.

 

You realize Miami was the first team to go undefeated in MAC play in nearly 70 years? The last time it occurred was 1958. Future MAC teams aren't going to be able to easily replicate Miami's path if it's a once in ~70 year occurrence. Even lower odds if the MAC expands to a 22 game conference schedule, like some have speculated.

 

Once again you're dealing in hypotheticals. We don't know what our record would be if we played Miami's schedule nor do we know what Miami's record would be if they played ours. The committee can only evaluate a team from the schedules each team played and the results from those games. 

 

Miami was an absurd 8-0 in games that were decided by 1 possession or went to OT. That's the real reason they're in the at-large conversation. They were a good team that had a few bounces go their way that turned what should have been a 4 or 5 loss season in 1 loss.

[UAZipster0305]

1 minute ago, kreed5120 said:

 

You realize Miami was the first team to go undefeated in MAC play in nearly 70 years? The last time it occurred was 1958. Future MAC teams aren't going to be able to easily replicate Miami's path if it's a once in ~70 year occurrence. Even lower odds if the MAC expands to a 22 game conference schedule, like some have speculated.

 

Once again you're dealing in hypotheticals. We don't know what our record would be if we played Miami's schedule nor do we know what Miami's record would be if they played ours. The committee can only evaluate a team from the schedules each team played and the results from those games.

 

Miami was an absurd 8-0 in games that were decided by 1 possession or went to OT. That's the real reason they're in the at-large conversation. They were a good team that had a few bounces go their way that turned what should have been a 4 or 5 loss season in 1 loss.

 

While it may be highly unusual on an annual basis, we've been within one game of doing it two years in a row now, and had Miami come to our place, that would have likely been our win and undefeated MAC season, not theirs. Luck of scheduling in their favor. Also, as you say, yes, they were highly lucky in about eight games. Context matters. 

 

So do hypotheticals. As you said before, it's necessary when there are only about 35 at-large slots for 300+ teams. Justifying Miami's entry on WAB is almost as weak as their schedule.

[Let'sGoZips94]

End of the MAC/Sun Belt challenge?

[Let'sGoZips94]