MAC Men in Post-Season

OK, so the dust has settled in the men's basketball post-seaosn.  Here is what we have...

(Ratings from BPI...because, why not?)

NCAA

Buffalo vs. Miami, Thursday

NIT

Akron@OSU, Tuesday

CIT

UT-Martin (210) @CMU (158) Wednesday
Ball State (160) at Tennessee State (176) Tuesday

CBI

Albany (141) at Ohio U. (124)

A couple other notes.  First, word on the Internet is that Kent declined the chance to play further.  I can completely understand this.  These are pay as you go tourneys with little upside to the teams that participate.  You might ask, as I did, why teams will play in any bowl game anytime, but not in these tournaments, and I think the answer is that these games are not on television, so they don't really help with anything.  Also a bowl game entails a week of the bowl lifestyle, while playing in the CIT will entail mostly the bus, airport and box lunch lifestyle.

Secondly, a lot of people in the MAC are upset that Akron did not get an at-large bid...or even get considered for one.  I think Akron did deserve consideration, but they did have flaws in their resume, with no really big wins and 3 baddish losses.  Of course, all teams have flaws when you are looking to finish filling the field in.  As for the argument that the Committee changes the rules to benefit big school teams, I say, "where have you been?"  Although, in fairness, the biggest stinker and it isn't close, is Tulsa being in and they aren't from a power conference.  FWIW, Tulsa won four games against Top 50 teams (as opposed to 0 by Akron) and lost 0 to 150+ teams (as opposed to 3 by Akron).  In fact, Tulsa ALSO beat Ohio, which was Akron's best win.

Anyway, if you think it is messed up, Joe Lunardi agrees with you.

Ultimately, the MAC is one bid league.  The reason is that (for example) Tulsa did not need a tough non-conference schedule.  Three of their four top 50 wins were conference games.