Dakich rips Chryst

Flipper · Post by **Flipper** » Tue Mar 01, 2005 1:07 am

During tonight's coach's show Dan was very critical of MAC commissioner Rick Chryst and the league office in general for thier failure to market basketball as strongly as football. He pointed out that the MAC is doing very well in the RPI rankings but no one knows about it because the commissioner is spending all his time working on getting a third bowl game.
He also said whoever wins the MAC tournament should probably call the NCAA to accept the invitation directly because the league office would most likely neglect to.

I think he has a point here. The MAC has a solid opportunity to snag an extra NCAA berth or two this year, but you don't see nearly the PR push that the league has devoted to nailing down post season opportunities in football.

I also wouldn't be suprised if he's a little torqued at the attention and resources allocated by the University to the football program. Until Urban Meyer, Gregg Brandon and Pooch showed up, BGSU was a basketball school more than anything else. Now football is king and the hockey team is generating more heat than the hoops team even though the men's basketball team is playing for a title in the final week of the season. That's something that couldn't be said for football or hockey.

Schadenfreude · Post by **Schadenfreude** » Tue Mar 01, 2005 6:47 am

I thought they used to archive these shows, but I don't see any.

Anyway.

Coach Dakich's anger surprises me.

Now, I understand that where Dakich stands is based on where he sits. If Dakich isn't going to stick up for hoops at Bowling Green, who will?

But, still -- is isn't as if the only thing Chryst is working on right now is the bowl game.

Expansion is clearly taking up part of his time -- and it sounds like Western Kentucky is getting a very serious look.

(And Western Kentucky ain't no football school.)

And this marketing thing needs to be put into perspective.

Yes, from Dakich's point of view, it would be nice if national media were singing the MAC's praises more than they are right now.

On the other hand, it is very doubtful that such buzz would influence the NCAA tournament selection committee.

So, really, what Dakich is after is just buzz -- buzz that can help recruiting, buzz that might help with the NIT.

And getting that buzz is a challenge. As much as Chryst has been rightfully praised for the amount of attention ESPN has lavished on our football these past few years, getting there has been easier in a sense.

The MAC is just one of 11 Division I-A leagues -- but one of 31 basketball leagues.

In hoops we vie with all kinds of leagues for attention that are simply off the map in football: The Atlantic 10, the Missouri Valley, even the Horizon (which, while not usually better than the MAC, is better positioned in big markets). Fox Sports' decision not to air Sunday's game because of the Great Backboard Incident is just one more reminder of what we are up against.

On a national scale, the competition is even more fierce: the West Coast, the Big West, etc.

Now, yes, this season, the MAC is better than almost all of those leagues I've mentioned -- but it isn't as if any of those leagues are going to back off and concede the point. Cutting through all the spin is difficult work.

The way I see it, just because the MAC's success in hoops isn't getting every bit of buzz we all think it deserves doesn't necessarily mean the MAC isn't trying.

And, in any case, our day is coming. I really think we are going to get more than one bid this year. The buzz will really get going then and carry right though to the off season.

My opinion.

golfertk14 · Post by **golfertk14** » Tue Mar 01, 2005 7:52 am

I don't think it was really apparent to me until FSN left the Arena because of "Backboardgate." I mean when I turned the TV on to see the game I saw an interview with some kids on an A-10 baseball team! What's this world coming to?!

Warthog · Post by **Warthog** » Tue Mar 01, 2005 8:59 am

Dakich mentioned the same thing on "1470, The Ticket" earlier in the day. Part of his beef is that there are like three good football teams and the rest stink, yet the MAC office markets it like crazy to get a third bowl bid. Now in basketball, the MAC is the RPI-rated ninth best conference in the coutry with like nine teams in the top 100 yet you don't see the MAC office doing anything to pump up the league to get any additional NCAA bids.

Tricky_Falcon · Post by **Tricky_Falcon** » Tue Mar 01, 2005 9:11 am

Right now I think the MAC office is pumping up and getting ready for the conference tournament that it will be hosting in about a week.

Schadenfreude · Post by **Schadenfreude** » Tue Mar 01, 2005 9:39 am

Warthog wrote:Now in basketball, the MAC is the RPI-rated ninth best conference in the coutry with like nine teams in the top 100 yet you don't see the MAC office doing anything to pump up the league to get any additional NCAA bids.

All the pub in the world won't get us extra at-large bids.

Dayons_Den · Post by **Dayons_Den** » Tue Mar 01, 2005 10:01 am

Schadenfreude wrote:
Warthog wrote:Now in basketball, the MAC is the RPI-rated ninth best conference in the coutry with like nine teams in the top 100 yet you don't see the MAC office doing anything to pump up the league to get any additional NCAA bids.
All the pub in the world won't get us extra at-large bids.

Schad,

I tend to agree because of past history and heartbreak. But I see similarity in this past football season/post to the current basketball season/post and am sympathetic with Dak's thoughts.

In football there were "extra" bowl spots because 1. a few power conferences sucked and didn't get enough bowl eligible teams and 2. that fight between Clemson and S.C. (or whomever it was. . .)

Now, in basketball we have 1. a pair of power conferences Big 10 and ACC that may only contribute 3 teams a piece to the field and we have some hoops teams with RPIs and such that are as deserving of NCAA bids as Marshall was a bowl game.

He strikes a point with me in that the MAC seemed to be pushing for everyone, even Akron, to go to a bowl (read $), but I do'nt see any pro-active measures being taken by the powers the are higher up than message boards.

Just my quick take.

hammb · Post by **hammb** » Tue Mar 01, 2005 10:29 am

This is a very strange year in the MAC Hoops world. I'm not sure we have any great teams capable of winning multiple games in the NCAAs. However, we have some of the best depth I can remember in awhile.

We are currently ranked 68th in the RPI, and there are a number of MAC teams ahead of us. I checked collegerpi.com last night and they had 3 MAC teams in their projected tourney bracket (Buffalo, Kent, and Miami). If we knock of Western & CMU, then make it to the final of the MAC Tourney we could very well be in the RPI picture as well.

Crazy year in the MAC guys, we certainly deserve multiple bids, and I hope Dakich has it wrong. Hopefully Chryst is working whatever contacts he has to get us that extra tourney bid, they're just going on in a less public fashion than his typical pleading for a 3rd bowl game.

Flipper · Post by **Flipper** » Tue Mar 01, 2005 10:38 am

This is the craziest year since 1980-1981 when there was a six way tie for first heading into the MAC tournament.

No really great teams this year, but a number of good ones. It'd be a shame to see deserving teams get slighted again because the league isn't
percieved in the proper light

UK Peregrine · Post by **UK Peregrine** » Tue Mar 01, 2005 10:42 am

Collegerpi.com also shows Akron making it (4 MAC teams). In fact, I'm pretty sure I heard on FoxRadio that no team ranked in the top 50 has yet to not make the tourney. I maybe wrong on this though.

Schadenfreude · Post by **Schadenfreude** » Tue Mar 01, 2005 11:07 am

UK Peregrine wrote:Collegerpi.com also shows Akron making it (4 MAC teams). In fact, I'm pretty sure I heard on FoxRadio that no team ranked in the top 50 has yet to not make the tourney. I maybe wrong on this though.

That's not correct. I think Oklahoma was once passed as a 33.

Kent State was passed on as a 36 about three years ago.

UK Peregrine · Post by **UK Peregrine** » Tue Mar 01, 2005 11:17 am

Schadenfreude wrote:
UK Peregrine wrote:Collegerpi.com also shows Akron making it (4 MAC teams). In fact, I'm pretty sure I heard on FoxRadio that no team ranked in the top 50 has yet to not make the tourney. I maybe wrong on this though.
That's not correct. I think Oklahoma was once passed as a 33.

Kent State was passed on as a 36 about three years ago.

Maybe this is what they were talking about.

RPI ranking: Finishing in the Top 35 is often considered the "safe zone" but the selection committee appears to look more carefully at each school's results than simply relying on the raw ranking. RPI is most useful in considering a school's record against the RPI Top 25, Top 50, Top 100 and bottom 100. LSU missed out with an RPI ranking of 38 last year and Southwest Missouri State and Kent State were No. 34 and 36 in 2000.

Also this is a decent article on USAToday.com about the tourney projections. They have BG as a bubble team.
http://www.usatoday.com/sports/college/ ... bubble.htm

Rollo83 · Post by **Rollo83** » Tue Mar 01, 2005 2:26 pm

The biggest thing we could have done as a conference was to get the MAC a seat on the powerful tournament selection committee. Chyrst did just that in lobbying to get Laing Kennedy, the AD from Kent State, on the committee this year.

How many times have bubble teams that have gotten into the tournament had a conference representative on the committee? Lots!

Politics have a lot more to do with those last five at-large teams than marketing does.

ffejfalcon · Post by **ffejfalcon** » Tue Mar 01, 2005 2:33 pm

I'm suprised some of these bracketology folks have Kent projected to make the tourney. I can see Miami and Buffalo but no way on Kent. They're just not that good and their record reflects that (10 losses).

Warthog · Post by **Warthog** » Tue Mar 01, 2005 2:45 pm

http://www.usatoday.com/sports/college/ ... bubble.htm

USA today has Miami, Akron and Buffalo all making the tourny and we are "on the bubble". Interesting when you look at all the "bubble" teams and their records against the Top 50. We are 4-2 8) No one else has near that good of a record and most have losing records. If the committee would put a lot of wieght on that, we could get an at-large bid. I know that is a huge stretch, but it is something that we have going for us.

Compare that to a team like UCLA. They are 16-9, but 2-7 vs the Top 50. But UCLA is getting serious consideration and we aren't getting a whiff of anything. They get credit for having a tough schedule, but why should that matter if you lose all those games against top teams?