no reason weitzen should get it.  he clearly hasn't been a standout player this year, and even though seniors are usually rewarded tufts was so bad especially in the conference that he wont get the benefit of the doubt.  its not possible to have pierce off the team and tufts wasn't good enough for 2 all conference players.

clinchy, i agree with your teams except maybe minus baskauskas and plus a rudin.  i dont know if amherst should get 3 guys since their stats dont stand out and they weren't too dominant in the league and obviously in the playoffs.  it is nearly impossible to pick the exact team, but i think you have it pretty spot on

who would win in a game, a school at the bottom of the nescac like tufts, williams, wesleyan or colby or the womens uconn or utennessee teams?

I was rethinking a bunch of things about this past year and years past and one thing has stood out.  There have been many number 2 and 3 teams in the nescac, but only 1 the past 4 years.  Year in and year out amherst is on top.  The one constant for every nescac school except for wesleyan are the coaches.  so why doesn't coach hixon win coach of the year ever year? 

He obviously deserves it.  No other school brings the talent amherst brings in.  Sure amherst has a great athletic and academic rep, but any better than williams?  and not too far behind some other nescac schools.  Not only does he bring the talent, but is able to keep it on the bench and have them wait their turn and still sell amherst to kids that could play 3 or 4 years at other school and break records, and have all league accomplishments etc.  ask any coach and they will  tell you recruiting is more than half the job.  no matter the year amherst is number 1, and as good as olsen is, he is not the reason amherst has been on top for 4 years.
Just because a team has a breakout year, doesnt mean the coach should win coach of the year.  for example
there has been some chatter about coach brown (midd) winning coach of the year, and sheldon (tufts) won it the year his team went to the sweet 16.  anyway, bottom line, hixon should get coach of the year even though his team was expected to play the way they have.

regarding mike walsh,

i'm glad to see him get some credit for the success middlebury is having.  he is a tremendous leader and competitor.  i have seen every nescac school play and i can say middlebury is not a top teir team as far as talent goes.  but walsh gets his whole team going.  he plays extremely hard, crashes the offensive and defensive glass, and does all the dirty work.  although smith might grab a lot of the accolades because he has the rebounding stats, im sure he would attribute his intensity on the glass to walsh.

i would like to see williams or any other nescac team compete away against a good team with 3 of their top 8 guys out of the game.  but i guess amherst doesnt count since all of their players would start on any other team.

word is that keene had 3 key players (2 starters) injured for the williams game also, just a side note

tufts over MIT 83-67

keene st. on tuesday

2 comments to the brandeis tournement,
congrats to ryan okeefe scoring his 1000 point against kenyon.

on a more sad note, bridgewater st.'s best player went diving into the stands in the second half and had to be taken off on a stretcher, and was not moving.  hope he turns out to be ok.

can someone explain to me why middlebury is projected as one of the top teams in the conference?  I think that people are missing the big picture with them last year.  while they are a physical team, and are tough to beat at home, they only had 2 players that you really needed to focus on.  ben rudin being one, and the other was evan thompson.  evam thompson seemed to wake up out of a coma last year and exploded onto the scene.  but with him gone, rudin is the only real force on the team.
i would love to hear other opinions on the panthers

while this topic is about to reach the level of this years amherst team versus amherst teams of years past, i felt like i wanted to still comment.
I think the best and most valid point was by weezy.  the point of this magazine and any type of all jewish, hispanic etc. teams is a sense of pride and community in a culture that is a minority to a larger group.  I'm not saying there shouldnt be an all white team for the nescac but lets be serious, how fun/interesting would that be?  I know from my jewish friends that they know every professional athlete there is, whether it be sean green, or kevin youkilis there is a pride issue to see a jewish athlete suceed at a professional level.  And thats the real reason for these sorts of things.  i know for jewish people sandy koufax was more than a legend.  and white irish kids, larry bird was up there too.  to have an all jewish team is not something that is publicized, which is why it is not on the schools websites, or posted on d3hoops.com, it is for people who are interested and those communities.
i'm sure all of us on this website would love to see an all d3 nba team.  its just a sensitive topic because it is about a religion.  but if you really examine and break down what is being talked about, it is just a small community recognizing the athletes that succeed in a group where they are the minority.  nothing more.

and if theres an all crazy team, why not all jewish???

a quick reply to senator, bedford was amazing.  i saw him play numerous times along with petrie.  although i dont have the stats in front of me, and petrie might have scored more, bedford was the better player, and i dont think it was even close.  Petrie got to shoot any time he touched the ball.  his shots often included 3 pump fakes and a fade away.  he was a great scorer with many moves, but multiple times while watching bedford, i would look at a stat sheet expecting to see 14 points and then seeing 25.  he scored in the flow, never forced and has just as much skill.  i think he had better strength also. 

winning gets recruits to come

also about the middlebury recruit,  middlebury has a great sports reputation aswell as williams.  im sure it is just a matter of preference and maybe playing time like you said.

when do the all nescac teams come out?

i think tufts is only 7-3 in the region since their losses to william patterson and stevens tech are both out of region.  correct me if i am wrong but i didnt think new jersey is in region.

as presented in a previous argument, the percentage of wins and losses versus opponents is a consideration.  fine there arent that many nationally ranked teams in new england, but you can still schedule games against opponents with winning records.  its pretty pathetic how many games amherst plays below average teams.  i think it helps a lot with your record to play cupcake games 3 out of 4 times.  it allows you to focus and get up for that tough game a lot easier than if you were to consistently play games that are meaningful games.  if you go out and constantly test yourself it is a bit different to only test yourself a few times every 10 games.  their stength of schedule could be a lot better than it is even in new england.

and by the way i saw springfield play, they are not a good team at all.  i am shocked trinity could lose to them.  they were really a weak team with few to no scorers.  i dont think there is any nescac team that should lose to them

formerbant explained what i was trying to say well.  but whatever we dont need to argue about it anymore.  also, on tufts schedule, they are playing two jersey teams in january, one of them being william patterson who i think bates played last year and made it in the ncaa tourney, a tough road game for the bo's, and they are hosting their own tip of tournement, the tufts invitational tournement or for short the t.i.....