We're down to five. Today's results broke pretty well for UB as both Akron and Western Michigan lost, removing the possibility of a massive tie at 11-7.
There are now five teams at 12-5 and 11-6, and they will make up the top five seeds in the MAC Tournament no matter what.
We did a publicly viewable Google Doc while I figured out the ties, and it was a huge hit and a ton of fun. Everything here comes from that, but head to this link to see the whole thing:
First, let's give you the current standings and tiebreakers:
|CMU||12 - 5||#1|
|UB||11 - 6||#2|
|Kent||11 - 6||#3|
|Toledo||11 - 6||#4|
|BG||11 - 6||#5|
Of the four teams currently tied at 11-6, we first compare aggregate head to head records: UB 3-1, UT 2-2, Kent 3-3, BG 1-3. That locks UB at #2 and BG at #5.
Kent and Toledo are tied at .500 against the selection, so they go to a head-to-head tiebreaker, which Kent wins based on their 2-0 record against Toledo.
UPDATE: Lots of people are asking about the process in a four-way tie. The short answer is no, they do not peel off one team and then run the multi-team tie process again. They don't do it when the order is clearly defined at 2-1, 1-1, 1-2 in a three-way tie, and they don't do it in 4-way or more.
Current Head to Head Records
|BG||1-0||0-1||[0-1]||1 - 1|
|Kent||1-0||2-0||1 - 1||0-2|
The brackets represent a game left to play, but it won't matter, because BG and UB can't tie anyway.
Everything that can possibly happen and the resulting seeds
The great news is that since six of the top seven teams play each other, only four game matter. Which means there's only 2^4=16 possible ways it can shake out, and fewer than 16 possible seedings.
This table has them all. We've got each possible combination of winners, the relevant records in that results, the resulting seeding, and the explanation for breaking any ties. You'll have to scroll left and right (slider is on the bottom). Sorry about that.
|CMU @ WMU||EMU @ UT||BG @ UB||KSU @ UA||Double checked?||#1 Seed||#2 Seed||#3 Seed||#4 Seed||#5 Seed||Notes and explanation|
|CMU 13-5||Toledo 12-6||UB 12-6, BG 11-7||Kent 12-6||Y||CMU||UB||Kent||Toledo||BG||UB-Kent-Toledo: UB 2-1, Kent 2-1, UT 1-2 H2H2H. Then UB 2-0 vs Kent 0-2 H2H|
|CMU 13-5||Toledo 12-6||UB 12-6, BG 11-7||(Akron) Kent 11-7||Y||CMU||UT||UB||Kent||BG||UT H2H over UB; Kent vs BG 1-1 H2H, both 1-0 vs CMU, Kent 2-0 vs UT, BG 0-1.|
|CMU 13-5||Toledo 12-6||BG 12-6, UB 11-7||Kent 12-6||Y||CMU||Kent||Toledo||BG||UB||Kent-BG-Toledo: Kent 3-1, BG 1-2, UT 1-2; Toledo H2H over BG|
|CMU 13-5||Toledo 12-6||BG 12-6, UB 11-7||(Akron) Kent 11-7||Y||CMU||Toledo||BG||UB||Kent||Toledo H2H over BG; UB H2H Kent|
|CMU 13-5||EMU (UT 11-7)||UB 12-6, BG 11-7||Kent 12-6||Y||CMU||UB||Kent||Toledo||BG||UB over Kent H2H; Toledo over BG H2H|
|CMU 13-5||EMU (UT 11-7)||UB 12-6, BG 11-7||(Akron) Kent 11-7||Y||CMU||UB||Kent||Toledo||BG||See Kent-BG-UT tie above|
|CMU 13-5||EMU (UT 11-7)||BG 12-6, UB 11-7||Kent 12-6||Y||CMU||Kent||BG||Toledo||UB||See Kent over BG above; Toledo H2H over Buffalo|
|CMU 13-5||EMU (UT 11-7)||BG 12-6, UB 11-7||(Akron) Kent 11-7||Y||CMU||BG||UB||Kent||Toledo||See top row for UB - Kent - UT three-way.|
|(WMU) (CMU 12-6)||Toledo 12-6||UB 12-6, BG 11-7||Kent 12-6||Y||CMU||Kent||UB||UT||BG||UB 2-3, CMU 4-1, UT 1-4, Kent 3-2 H2H2H2H|
|(WMU) (CMU 12-6)||Toledo 12-6||UB 12-6, BG 11-7||(Akron) Kent 11-7||Y||CMU||UT||UB||Kent||BG||CMU-UT-UB: CMU 4-0, UT 1-2, UB 0-3 H2H2H; Kent over BG see above|
|(WMU) (CMU 12-6)||Toledo 12-6||BG 12-6, UB 11-7||Kent 12-6||Y||Kent||BG||CMU||UT||UB||CMU 2-2, Toledo 1-4, BG 2-2, Kent 4-1 H2H2H2H; BG H2H over CMU|
|(WMU) (CMU 12-6)||Toledo 12-6||BG 12-6, UB 11-7||(Akron) Kent 11-7||Y||CMU||BG||UT||UB||Kent||CMU 2-1, BG 1-1, UT 1-2 H2H2H; UB H2H Kent|
|(WMU) (CMU 12-6)||EMU (UT 11-7)||UB 12-6, BG 11-7||Kent 12-6||Y||CMU||UB||Kent||UT||BG||CMU 2-1, UB 2-2, Kent 1-2 H2H2H; Toledo H2H over BG|
|(WMU) (CMU 12-6)||EMU (UT 11-7)||UB 12-6, BG 11-7||(Akron) Kent 11-7||Y||CMU||UB||Kent||UT||BG||CMU H2H UB; Kent-BG-UT see above; Toledo H2H over BG|
|(WMU) (CMU 12-6)||EMU (UT 11-7)||BG 12-6, UB 11-7||Kent 12-6||Y||Kent||BG||CMU||UT||UB||Kent and BG 2-1, CMU 1-2 H2H2H; Kent over BG see above (maybe division record matters here?); UT H2H UB|
|(WMU) (CMU 12-6)||EMU (UT 11-7)||BG 12-6, UB 11-7||(Akron) Kent 11-7||Y||BG||CMU||UB||Kent||Toledo||BG H2H over CMU; UB 2-1, Kent 2-2, UT 1-2 H2H2H|
So what does Buffalo need for...
...the #2 seed?
- Obviously UB needs to win
- UB win + EMU win and UB is #2
- If Toledo beats EMU, UB also takes #2 with their own win, a and a Kent win over Akron and a CMU win over WMU
- With a win, #3 is as far as UB can drop
- With a loss, UB snags #3 with Akron and EMU wins
- Obviously this means a loss, so that's sad, but with an Akron win UB can not drop out of the top four.
- A loss and a Kent win