The Current, Sad Reality of the Big Dance

If you have been reading my column long enough might know I'm a native of Akron, Ohio and a longtime Akron Zip fan. My stepdad worked at the school and I went to my share of Zip football and basketball games as a kid. To see Akron win a NCAA tournament game — something quite a few MAC schools have accomplished, but Akron has not — is a bucket list item for me, and I turn 50 tomorrow.

Last year, Akron went 17-1 in MAC play and won the MAC tournament, but once again fell in the 1st round of the Big Dance. This year, they again have gone 17-1 in conference play, but of course, they are nonetheless completely and rightfully overshadowed by that team that went 18-0 in conference and 31-0 overall, Miami of Ohio.

My X timeline is absolutely full of takes on Miami. My own take is probably the one shared by 80%-90% of the college basketball fan community, which is that of course they should be in even if they lose in the MAC tournament.

Yes, there is that 10-20% that say teams like Auburn are more deserving because the metrics say so, and they clearly have more high-quality wins. And hell, they do have a point. If Auburn and Miami squared off on a neutral court, Auburn would probably be favored, and rightfully so. So you don't even have to be a mid-major or Cinderella hater to advocate for the Auburns of the bubble.

Still, part of the reason (and again, I am hardly the first person making this point) Miami has played such a weak schedule is because high majors are reluctant to schedule them, along with any other mid-major team that appears strong.

"OH YEAH?" the doubters say, "LOOKS LIKE AKRON PLAYED PURDUE THIS YEAR, SO WHY COULDN'T MIAMI HAVE DONE THAT?"

Two things the doubters aren't considering: first, that Purdue game is the first true road game against a high major that Akron has been able to schedule in five seasons. Second, Purdue is one of those schools, like, say, Duke or UConn, that knows it is highly unlikely they will be a bubble team that could be hurt by a loss to a team like Akron.

No, teams that actually do need to consider their potential place on the bubble have verifiably, thanks to the Freedom of Information Act, requested opponents that rank 250 NET or lower. Miami has released documents showing high majors turning them down (to which the doubters point to the buy game part of the request, as if Miami invented the concept of a buy game themselves to try to exploit the high majors instead of it being absolutely standard).

These difficulties faced by good mid-majors warrant consideration, in my opinion, by the NCAA committee.

Now, one thing Miami has going against it is that so, so, so, many of their games have been very close. For some people to respect a team like Miami, they have to be blowing everyone out. Which brings me back to Akron — despite their loss to Miami, in their other conference games, Akron has 1 loss by one possession or in overtime. Miami has 8. All the famous number-crunchers of college basketball (Kenpom, Bart Torvik, the NET, etc.) have Akron ahead of Miami.

Does that mean that in a just world, Akron would be a more likely candidate for the bubble than the Redhawks?

No, I don't think so. Wins and losses have to matter. It has to be one of the most, if not the most, important metric. And not only has Miami got the better won/loss record (Akron has lost five games), but of course they beat Akron.

Yes, the scheduling gods smiled upon Miami this year because they did not have to travel to Akron. But Akron hasn't beaten anyone that impressive; the reason their metrics look so great is because they pound everyone they beat, and the underlying metrics flow from there. I mentioned how Akron only beat one team by a single possession in MAC play; that number remains at one if you count non-conference play, too.

No, I think the most just thing to happen would be for Akron and Miami both to get into the NCAA tournament, regardless of who wins the MAC tournament. It seems ridiculous that Akron could be considered for an at-large with five losses and no impressive wins. To be sure, Akron is definitely not getting in unless they win the MAC tournament. But it wasn't always that way, and this takes us to the part that I do not think is not discussed nearly enough.

In the 1990s, the MAC got an at-large berth to the NCAA tournament three times: Miami in 1995 and 1999, and Western Michigan in 1998. Each of those teams lost at least 6 times. Now, between shifting priorities of the NCAA committee and those scheduling difficulties good mid-majors face, that many is losses is not overcome-able by a mid-major anymore.

But it gets better. Also in 1995, in the similarly-named MAAC, Manhattan got an at-large bid — as a #13 seed! — despite having 4 losses. "One thing that kept sticking out to us was that they'd won 25 games," said Kansas Athletic Director and 1995 committee chair Bob Frederick.

You see, wins and losses used to really, really matter.

By the way, that #13-seed Manhattan beat #4-seed Oklahoma that year.