I know Akron won the MAC regular season and is the #1 seed, but I just don't think they are the best team in the MAC, even if they win this tournament. I think both OU and UB are better teams IMO and UB swept Akron and Ohio just destroyed them recently (OU also swept UB this year).
Even if Akron wins the regular season and conference tournament you don't think they're the best team?
Absolutely. I would be saying the same thing if BG was in their place. I think their are three or four teams you could make a case for as best team in the MAC (Akron, Buffalo, Ohio and probably Kent State). Each is worth consideration. I'm just not sold on Akron. Now I am not saying Akron isn't deserving of the one-seed. They are, they earned it without a doubt per their record. But no, I don't think the Zips are the best team in the MAC. They got past us by one on a last-second shot, needed OT to beat WMU, were swept by Buffalo and were destroyed by Ohio. So if they win two games in the MAC Tournament and win it, it doesn't mean they are the best in my book, nor would it be if NIU ran the table and won it. When BG was the #1 seed a few years ago I didn't think we were the best team in the MAC whatsoever. But we were, by record, the #1 seed. When Ohio won the MAC Tournament as a #9 seed two years ago, I didn't think they were the best team either - but it didn't matter, they played the better games and beat the #1, #2 and #4 seeds en route to the title. Butler made the National Championship game the last two years, but that doesn't make them the second-best "team" in the country. but they certainly were one of only two still standing in the end. Come tournament time, whether it's conference championships or the NCAA Tournament, it's all about seeding and matchups. You play who you advance to meet. You don't have to be the better team, you just have to play the better game. Kentucky is arguably the best tem in the country, but it just takes one loss in the tournment for someone else to win the title and wear that crown.