{mosimage}What's up MAC?

Kent State's awful performance Thursday against UNLV in the NCAA Tourney only reaffirms the lack of respect for MAC basketball by college basketball fans.

Seriously, could the MAC have embarrassed itself any worse? The Golden Flashes scored just 10 points in the first half while averaging one turnover per minute during an eight minute scoring drought. Half time score: UNLV 31 - Kent State 10

Kent read, Kent write, Kent score

Still, when it comes to the NCAA's Tourney at-large selection committee, the MAC is usually a one and done conference; automatic-bid in, everyone else out.

I use to believe this was an injustice. After all, how could so-called college basketball experts overlook the hardy teams of the MAC?

Well, maybe I should take another look. Warning: It's not pretty.

The MAC has failed to win a first round NCAA game in five years. The last first round win came in 2003 as (11) Central Michigan defeated (5) Creighton. Then, the Chippewas promptly lost to (3) Duke in the second round.

So, what's a MAC team to do? Basically, start winning games when they count. Think Gonzaga.

Former Gonzaga standout Chester Molester

Gonzaga basketball burst onto the national scene during the 1999 season with its improbable run to the Elite Eight.

In the ‘99 tournament the Zags' molded a Cinderella image with victories against the (2), (6), and (7) seeds. This image has continued to grow as Gonzaga has advanced to the second round of the NCAA Tournament in 7 of the last 9 years.

Despite never reaching a Final Four, college basketball fans now recognize Gonzaga men's basketball as an elite hoops program.

Not to mention, when the Bulldogs do fall in the tournament it's not by much on the scoreboard. Having faced (1) UConn, (2) UCLA, and (6) Texas Tech since 1999, the Zags average margin of loss is less than three points.

And, while most fans still have no idea what conference the Bulldogs play in or what its regular season schedule is like year-to-year, all college basketball fans seem to know is Gonzaga is a near-lock pick on their brackets.

In turn, Gonzaga's tourney success also earns the selection committee's respect. And, the Zags' also improves its own national image and that of its conference (even if we can't always remember its name) and its individual members. Understand this MAC?

A member of the West Coast Conference

Still, what the MAC also needs to understand is that the majority of the college basketball world doesn't care about mid-major hoops during the regular season. Rather, fans crave North Carolina vs. Duke, Kansas against Texas and not Western Michigan vs. Eastern Michigan.

Certainly, this aspect is largely out of the conference's control but, the MAC does have that one opportunity every year to steal the spotlight. Of course, that time is in March when it's in style for mid-majors to upset the top-seeded Dukies and Spartans of the tourney.

So, until mid-March the mid-majors can't expect the college basketball world to come to its defense as legitimate programs. For conferences like the MAC it's all about putting your best foot forward in March.

Unfortunately, the MAC hasn't cashed in on such an opportunity since 2002 when (10) Kent State made a run for the ages by upsetting (2) Alabama, (3) Pittsburgh and fighting tooth-and-nail before losing against an eventual Final Four team, (5) Indiana.

In fact, it was this run by Kent State that made me speak up for MAC basketball. However, six years later there hasn't been much to chirp about.

Now, I better understand why the selection committee doesn't look more favorable at the MAC when it comes to choosing at-large bids, they can't because the MAC won't let them.

Notes

• Here's a more detailed look at the MAC's recent failures in the NCAA Tournament.

2008 - (9) Kent State loses against (8) UNLV

2007 - (14) Miami loses against (3) Oregon

2006 - (12) Kent State loses against (5) Pittsburgh

2005 - (13) Ohio loses against (4) Florida

2004 - (11) W. Michigan loses against (6) Vanderbilt

2003 - (11) C. Michigan wins against (5) Creighton then loses against (3) Duke

2002 - (10) Kent State defeats (7) Oklahoma State, (2) Alabama, (3) Pittsburgh and finally falls to eventual Final Four team (5) Indiana

2001 - (13) Kent State loses to (4) Indiana

2000 - (11) Ball State loses against (6) UCLA 65-57

• Dating back to the 2000 tourney, the MAC has lost seven first round games by an average of nine points per game.

• In the same time period, the average seeding for MAC teams is 11th with its highest seed a nine and lowest 14th.

• MAC, upgrade the web site! It's not that the site is completely horrible from a user's stand point, but it looks so mid-major.

• Note of clarity: I'm not a MAC basketball hater and I wish this conference well. And, as an alumnus of the MAC I'll probably always follow MAC basketball. So please MAC, stop whining and start winning.

Speaking of my Bobcats, I'm still happy with head coach Tim O'Shea's performance. Of course, there's an argument to be made that considering the team's talent level the program has underachieved since making the NCAA Tournament in 2005.

However, some of the better talent didn't just choose to play in Athens by spinning a globe, O'Shea's and his staff reeled them in. Plus, I fully expect O'Shea to add more talent in the coming off season.

Does this necessarily mean more wins for Ohio? I don't know for sure but, we know adding good talent won't hurt the program either.

Besides, it has been well documented that O'Shea still yearns for a return to his roots on the East coast. So, for the anti-O'Shea supporters don't expect the coach to be in Athens forever. But, maybe at least consider enjoying the 20 win seasons while he's still in Southeast Ohio.

In O'Shea's last four seasons the Bobcats have managed at least 19 wins. And, the Cats' have averaged about 10 conference wins per year in the same time span.

Tim O'Shea's record at Ohio University

2007-08: (20-12), 9-7

2006-07: (19-13), 9-7

2005-06: (19-11), 10-8 *Won MAC Championship

2004-05: (21-11), 11-7

2003-04: (10-20), 7-11

2002-03: (14-16), 8-10

2001-02: (17-11), 11-7

TrackBack URI for this entry

Comments (0)

Subscribe to this comment's feed

Name

Email

Website

Title

Comment

smaller | bigger

Subscribe via email (Registered users only)

I have read and agree to the Terms of Usage.

Add Comment