Buffalo and OU

Falcon137 · Post by **Falcon137** » Wed Nov 30, 2011 9:30 pm

Just got back from watching Buffalo dismantle Dayton at UD Arena. The Bulls are very, very good this year.

Also saw OU won at Marshall, Marshall was 5-0 coming off a win at Cincinnati.

The MAC is very good this year.

Mississippi State, West Virginia, Temple, Dayton, Marshall. Am I missing anyone? A lot of good wins for the MAC early in the year.

h2oville rocket · Post by **h2oville rocket** » Wed Nov 30, 2011 10:54 pm

Falcon137 wrote:Just got back from watching Buffalo dismantle Dayton at UD Arena. The Bulls are very, very good this year.

Also saw OU won at Marshall, Marshall was 5-0 coming off a win at Cincinnati.

The MAC is very good this year.

Mississippi State, West Virginia, Temple, Dayton, Marshall. Am I missing anyone? A lot of good wins for the MAC early in the year.

Dayton has wins over Minni and Wake Forest. Only losses were to miami and Buffalo.

BGSU33 · Post by **BGSU33** » Thu Dec 01, 2011 12:17 am

Ohio nearly beat #7 Louisville the other night too. OU led in the closing minutes before the Cardinal pulled it out.

Falconfreak90 · Post by **Falconfreak90** » Thu Dec 01, 2011 6:41 am

The MAC has been very impressive so far this season.

1987alum · Post by **1987alum** » Thu Dec 01, 2011 12:30 pm

Will any of this translate into a second bid come March?

BleedOrange · Post by **BleedOrange** » Thu Dec 01, 2011 2:48 pm

I too have noticed that the MAC has been winning quality games so far.

Ten of the 12 teams are looking at least decent. NIU and WMU, are 0-6 last time I checked.

1897alum, the question boils down to this: how many MAC teams will be on the bubble and NOT win the MAC tourney. The overall conference power rating has a very indirect influence. Then again, maybe the selection process is all a facade and it actually comes down to a team's potential TV ratings?

transfer2BGSU · Post by **transfer2BGSU** » Thu Dec 01, 2011 3:07 pm

BleedOrange wrote:
1897alum, the question boils down to this: how many MAC teams will be on the bubble and NOT win the MAC tourney.

I know the answer to how many teams will NOT win the MAC tourney!!!

footballguy51 · Post by **footballguy51** » Thu Dec 01, 2011 7:12 pm

We are the MAC. So, unfortunately everybody assumes we don't deserve more than one bid.

hammb · Post by **hammb** » Thu Dec 01, 2011 9:53 pm

footballguy51 wrote:We are the MAC. So, unfortunately everybody assumes we don't deserve more than one bid.

Other than our team in 2002 I'm not sure the MAC has really had a team that deserved an at large bid get snubbed in the past decade.

Drago · Post by **Drago** » Thu Dec 01, 2011 10:34 pm

+1

Jay Bilas summed it up pretty well a few years ago talking about at large bids. He basically said that the committee's job was to pick teams to compete for a national title, not reward mid majors for a nice season. The MAC hasn't been a conference to be considered for multipleit bids since the late 90s early 2000s.

BGSU33 · Post by **BGSU33** » Thu Dec 01, 2011 10:59 pm

Drago wrote:+1

Jay Bilas summed it up pretty well a few years ago talking about at large bids. He basically said that the committee's job was to pick teams to compete for a national title, not reward mid majors for a nice season. The MAC hasn't been a conference to be considered for multipleit bids since the late 90s early 2000s.

While I somewhat agree with that idea, let's be honest....who in the world could have or would have thought, picked or expected Butler to play in not one, but back- to- back NCAA Championship games??? Or for a team like VCU to make the Final Four??? The answer is no one. So while I do somewhat agree with what Bilas said, I also agree with giving "good" teams a chance to be great.

AyZiggy97 · Post by **AyZiggy97** » Fri Dec 02, 2011 12:22 am

The MAC got four teams into the NCAA volleyball tournament that just started. It helped that Northern Ill. had a good RPI and lost in the finals to Central Mich. So, it can be done. Honestly I have no idea what the league has done correctly in that sport that it is not doing in basketball, both men's and women's.

Pete Segaard · Post by **Pete Segaard** » Fri Dec 02, 2011 12:27 pm

BleedOrange wrote:I too have noticed that the MAC has been winning quality games so far.

Ten of the 12 teams are looking at least decent. NIU and WMU, are 0-6 last time I checked.

1897alum, the question boils down to this: how many MAC teams will be on the bubble and NOT win the MAC tourney. The overall conference power rating has a very indirect influence. Then again, maybe the selection process is all a facade and it actually comes down to a team's potential TV ratings?

Does he even remember what teams are playing?

jscottfitzwater · Post by **jscottfitzwater** » Wed Dec 07, 2011 5:23 pm

Agree, hammb.

Drago wrote:Jay Bilas summed it up pretty well a few years ago talking about at large bids. He basically said that the committee's job was to pick teams to compete for a national title, not reward mid majors for a nice season..

Of course, that's not what they do. Their job is to pick the teams who had the best season. If it was just about who can win a title, there would be what, six at-larges?

Buffalo and OU

Buffalo and OU

Re: Buffalo and OU

Re: Buffalo and OU

Re: Buffalo and OU

Re: Buffalo and OU

Re: Buffalo and OU

Re: Buffalo and OU

Re: Buffalo and OU

Re: Buffalo and OU

Re: Buffalo and OU

Re: Buffalo and OU

Re: Buffalo and OU

Re: Buffalo and OU

Re: Buffalo and OU