MAC football is enjoying a memorable season with a lot of strong teams.

MAC men's basketball is NOT enjoying a memorable season by any stretch. Mediocre is a good word to describe it.

Back in the early part of the last decade the MAC was among those conferences just outside the elite big conferences.

Any thoughts why?

MAC and MAC schools putting $ into football instead of basketball?

Non-FBS schools pumping $ into hoops, not football?

Poor recruiting throughout the Midwest (as more Midwest players leave for other parts of the country)?

Coaching changes?

Here are the Sagarins for this season and '04/'05...

http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/sports/sa...kc1213.htm

http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/sports/sa...kc0405.htm

Also:

http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/sports/sa...kc0203.htm

I will say that EMU might be trying to turn around the talent problem on the EMU squad.

Murphy has brought in significant transfers like Riley (Syracuse), Bryant (Arkansas), Harrison (Wyoming) and transfer sitout Talley (Duquesne).

EMU was not winning with the players Ramsey had brought in the last few years.

We need a major infusion of players who can excel in this conference.

I can understand where EMU has been and is now trying to go. I do not understand the 11 other teams.

So who do you think is not trying?

What makes EMU's transfers "significant" compared to other transfers MAC schools are getting?

I like Murphy, but I don't see EMU busting out of the large pack of crappy MAC basketball this season. Their performance so far has been underwhelming for year two of the Murphy plan. Not horrible, but looking like an RPI 150 kind of team. I know that's an improvement over the Ramsey era, but it's not different from the average MAC team you are complaining about. It's not like EMU is setting the pace for other MAC teams to follow.

(12-06-2012 06:45 AM)axeme Wrote:  So who do you think is not trying?

What makes EMU's transfers "significant" compared to other transfers MAC schools are getting?

I like Murphy, but I don't see EMU busting out of the large pack of crappy MAC basketball this season. Their performance so far has been underwhelming for year two of the Murphy plan. Not horrible, but looking like an RPI 150 kind of team. I know that's an improvement over the Ramsey era, but it's not different from the average MAC team you are complaining about. It's not like EMU is setting the pace for other MAC teams to follow.

Simple trying to increase the talent base. Next year is the breakout season. We have plenty of talent at all positions EXCEPT PG this year (we have a good transfer sitout PG)

Riley was a 3-star recruit at Syracuse and wanted to come back home.

Bryant was a 3-star recruit at Arkansas and wanted to come back home.

We had another 3-star recruit who is now off the team because of a previous legal incident.

Harrison was a 2-star recruit at Wyoming and came back to the Midwest.

Talley (transfer sitout) was I guess a 2-star but a starting PG at Duquesne.

Those who saw the Syracuse game saw that EMU controlled the game for over 10 minutes until the Orange applied their full court, trapping defense and EMU's ball handling crumbled.

Our team is still a year away. Riley, Bryant, Harrison, etc. will be seniors. Talley will be a redshirt (transfer) junior at PG and star JUCO Karrington Ward will be a junior SF/SG.

Word is that Talley is the 'real deal' at PG a position now maned by two frosh (not good!).

How many of those players were significant contributors at their previous schools? Recruiting ratings don't mean much once the kid hits campus...

Just curious what level you think this talent is? What does a breakout year mean to you? How good would you have to be to call it a breakout year or a failure? Top 50? Top 100?

Akron and Ohio have struggled compared to expectations but I suspect they will be fine.

MAC football started off with NIU losing to Iowa and Kent getting blown out by Kentucky. They turned it around... Basketball will do the same.

The difference is that NIU and KSU were not pre-season favorites. Maybe the same will happen in basketball--a team not picked to be at the top will emerge like NIU and KSU did and the favorites will fade.

While Ohio and Akron will probably be fine relative to the rest of MAC, the opportunity to be significant beyond the MAC appears to be disappearing, except for the opportunity for some MAC team to make a post-season run. In a year when it looked like the MAC might move up, it has been a real disappointment.

(12-06-2012 08:23 AM)The Optimist Wrote:  Akron and Ohio have struggled compared to expectations but I suspect they will be fine.

MAC football started off with NIU losing to Iowa and Kent getting blown out by Kentucky. They turned it around... Basketball will do the same.

It also included many significant OOC wins, over teams like PSU, Iowa, Kansas, etc.

Where are the significant MAC OOC bball wins?

BG's troubles can be attributed to the decision to hire and extend one Louis Orr.

(12-06-2012 08:57 AM)El Grande Flippero Wrote:  BG's troubles can be attributed to the decision to hire and extend one Louis Orr.

But BG is in the middle of the conference. I am curious as to what the conference and its members should do differently.

(12-06-2012 08:49 AM)DrTorch Wrote:  

(12-06-2012 08:23 AM)The Optimist Wrote:  Akron and Ohio have struggled compared to expectations but I suspect they will be fine.

MAC football started off with NIU losing to Iowa and Kent getting blown out by Kentucky. They turned it around... Basketball will do the same.

It also included many significant OOC wins, over teams like PSU, Iowa, Kansas, etc.

Where are the significant MAC OOC bball wins?

If you call Iowa or Kansas significant wins this year in football you also need to call the basketball wins over PSU and Nebraska significant. I'm happy with the wins over Drexel and Richmond as well.

(12-06-2012 08:57 AM)El Grande Flippero Wrote:  BG's troubles can be attributed to the decision to hire and extend one Louis Orr.

Or every coach for the last decade after DD ran out of gas.

I thought Orr would do a lot better than he has. I'd agree that his chances for success now are pretty much gone. They look like a 5th or 6th place team in the East, and that is unacceptable this far into his tenure.

You get what you pay for and for the last ten years or so we have been lagging way behind what our former peers (MVC) spend. The results on the court are right in line with what we spend.

(12-06-2012 09:16 AM)OUVan Wrote:  You get what you pay for and for the last ten years or so we have been lagging way behind what our former peers (MVC) spend. The results on the court are right in line with what we spend.

Bingo. This is one possible answer to my question.

The non-FBS schools are plowing money into hoops while we (the MAC) are trying to feed the money guzzler, football, and basketball.

(12-06-2012 07:31 AM)axeme Wrote:  How many of those players were significant contributors at their previous schools? Recruiting ratings don't mean much once the kid hits campus...

Just curious what level you think this talent is? What does a breakout year mean to you? How good would you have to be to call it a breakout year or a failure? Top 50? Top 100?

Top 100 which would indicate some kind of post season.

If EMU got top 50 next season it will be a nice surprise.

Top 50 meaning better than 6/7ths of D-I (I assume there are approaching 350 D-I hoops programs).

Riley was a 3 star recruit and hurt his first year at Syracuse. Didn't get to practice or play too much. He is a true talent on defense. He had 6 blocks against top 5 Syracuse Monday. Offense is a work in progress.

Bryant was a contributor at Arkansas as a say 7th or 8th man. As most know, the 8th best player on most B1G, SEC, ACC, BE, etc. schools can play. Very athletic and versatile.

Talley started as a frosh PG at Duquesne until that program went into disarray.

Last season Murphy got it done with smoke and mirrors (mostly his 2 - 3 zone and hope to steal a close game). That was NOT a talented team on the floor and Riley looked as rusty as rusty can look.

(12-06-2012 09:04 AM)The Optimist Wrote:  

(12-06-2012 08:49 AM)DrTorch Wrote:  

(12-06-2012 08:23 AM)The Optimist Wrote:  Akron and Ohio have struggled compared to expectations but I suspect they will be fine.

MAC football started off with NIU losing to Iowa and Kent getting blown out by Kentucky. They turned it around... Basketball will do the same.

It also included many significant OOC wins, over teams like PSU, Iowa, Kansas, etc.

Where are the significant MAC OOC bball wins?

If you call Iowa or Kansas significant wins this year in football you also need to call the basketball wins over PSU and Nebraska significant. I'm happy with the wins over Drexel and Richmond as well.

Drexel is 2-6. With losses to Rider and Tennessee State.

(12-06-2012 09:23 AM)emu steve Wrote:  

(12-06-2012 09:16 AM)OUVan Wrote:  You get what you pay for and for the last ten years or so we have been lagging way behind what our former peers (MVC) spend. The results on the court are right in line with what we spend.

Bingo. This is one possible answer to my question.

Bingo how? How does simply spending money improve the product? Are recruits being paid under the table?

Quote:The non-FBS schools are plowing money into hoops while we (the MAC) are trying to feed the money guzzler, football, and basketball.

Even if you get what you pay for...are we getting a better or worse ROI?

Bingo in that our facilities overall as a conference do not match up with the MVC and the majority of our teams still do not charter planes. Recruits see these things.

Classic example is Oakland University. They schedule a ridiculous amount of high profile BCS squads in their non conference games because they want to to charter a plane everywhere they go. It's a selling point for recruits. So now, instead of players like Valentine, Mondy, Bader and Petros (not to mention Jalen Hayes next year) all playing in the MAC, they end up at Oakland in the Summit league. Our product has gradually been diluted over time. We aren't getting the talent we used to get and it starts with the budgets.

Coaching salaries are another example. We lag behind big time as a conference.

We are gonna get what we pay for.

The best players are now individual players, not team players. Basketball is now an individual sport and no longer a team sport at the elite levels.

This is fine for let's say the top 50 schools because there are enough good to great individual players out there to be recruited to and play at the big schools.

The problem is that while EVERY player out there wants to be a great individual player, not all can be great individual players. So instead of those not great individual players becoming great team players, they wallow on as intermediate individual players.

At the college level, once you get past those 50 great teams, you simply have collections of medium to low skill players who never learned the team game; and the team game is seemingly the only way those non-great teams can win. The MAC needs team players. But all that is out there are individual players without team skills.

But there are not a lot of Hoosier-team-type programs anymore. It's all about dunks and posturing and trash talking and popping your jersey and hitting the three from NBA range. This is fine for the 5star from a badass high school who is going to Kentucky. This doesn't translate for the 2 star from a farm town going to NIU.

But the attitude is the same - I am badass, hear me roar - even if my team is 3-17.

That lack of team skills is what hurts MAC type schools, because we cannot attract the same quality of individual player as the upper echelon of basketball schools can...

Remember, being a Division One basketball player means you are pretty damn elite, and it also means you were probably a bit of a bad ass individual player in high school, leading the team and holding court on your shoulders. When you get to the MAC school, the five players on the team all want to still be the star, but few of them have start talent at the D1 level anymore, and without the team player skills you have no team cohesion.

It's just a thought. But I do believe I am tracking straight with this.......

One issue is players:

Remember the days we watched the NBA draft to see which MAC players would get drafted.

Now?