Quote from: Ralph Turner on March 01, 2009, 11:15:52 PM

Quote from: susiddad on March 01, 2009, 10:58:06 PM
Maryville lost to a 9-16 team.  Susquehanna did not.  Champions guards shot 3-31 in a game.  That is amazing and that should count for a lot especially when SU did not have any loss like that.  And excuses that are performance based "an off shooting night" just means your team couldnt gut out a win against a poor team.  

Can someone explain why SU is not in here and Maryville which sounds like an online college is in the discussion?

I am not a Maryville fan.  In fact, they are one of the teams that I like to root against most of the time.  Kinda like the Green Bay Packers, Dallas Cowboys, New York Yankees thing.

Criteria that the committee might be reviewing...

2-point home loss to SCAC Pool A Centre
6-point road loss to SCAC Pool ACentre
8-point neutral floor win over ODAC Pool A VWC
6-point road loss to HCAC Pool A Transylvania
39-point home win over USA South Pool A Averett.

We don't know which of those teams are in the Regional rankings, but they are all "in-region" results.

We know that Maryville has an in-region record of 16-6, and that the win over D-2 rival Carson Newman does not count.

With all of the losses in the South Region, we don't know if they will be ranked.  We will find out what the national committee thinks.

What factors that are criteria do you think make the case for Susquehanna?

Thanks.  

I agree.  I would like to hear your arguments for Susquehanna.  Welcome to the boards, but your team just lost.  These other teams are on huge winning streaks.  If Susquehanna goes it will be a travesty just like last year where Monravia got in and Chapman did not.

Quote from: The Wiz on March 01, 2009, 10:06:45 PM

Quote from: elfinley on March 01, 2009, 07:31:08 PM
This is really getting out of hand.

One group will never be convinced Chapman is worthy of a birth this year, and the other group will never be convinced the process of selecting teams is fair. Truth is, both sides are right! The process could be better, but until CU's schedule improves, they have very little margin of error in their games in order to make it. This conversation is getting very old.

I think we all appreciate everyone's passion for this but lets all just agree to disagree and wish all teams hoping for a pool b bid(Chapman included) good luck.

Fair enough. The decision comes out tomorrow and we will all see what the committee decided. Good luck to whoever makes it.

The Wiz is a quitter to our cause lol

Quote from: Pat Coleman on March 01, 2009, 06:57:13 PM
Wiz, no offense but the 10th time the question gets asked, you're going to get a short reply.

I don't think asking a question 10 times is a problem if you get 1 unreasonable answer over and over (Dallas).

When I was a kid a guy pulled a quarter from my ear and I asked how.  He said magic, so I asked again over and over.  Was it dumb of me to keep asking because it was an unreasonable answer? 

My hope is that the committee sees Maryville's 1-3 (or 1-4) regionally ranked record and that tells them they can't compete with upper eschelon teams, but Chapman's 1-1 with the loss to Whitworth (who beat undefeated Puget Sound) shows they can be competitive and make a push in the playoffs.

Quote from: sac on March 01, 2009, 04:26:17 PM
This has got to be the longest running conversation about a Pool B team ever.

It's the longest I've seen in the past 3 years, but I think that's because there is such a split between people who believe Chapman is better than Maryville and people who think one game should keep a great team out of the playoffs.

Quote from: Pat Coleman on March 01, 2009, 12:27:20 PM
Even on a bad day, an at-large team should still beat U.Dallas.

Quote from: Pat Coleman on March 01, 2009, 04:19:07 PM
You should be able to beat U of Dallas on a bad night if you want to make the NCAA Tournament.

Rather than deflecting and trying to place blame elsewhere, let's look right back at a Chapman schedule which didn't give the team a chance if it lost more than two games.

BTW, Rust has a winning record. Dallas, not even close.

Wrong.  Bring any team to a neutral site and let their guards shoot 3-31 and see if they fair any better.  It was a poor shooting night, not a show of how good or bad the team is overall.  

With that kind of logic no upsets would ever happen in college basketball.  That's why you play the game, sometimes the ball goes in and sometimes it doesn't.  Following that argument would lead anyone to believe every at large team would beat every mediocre team in America.  Completely and utterly not true.

And Dallas would give Rust a run for their money, guaranteed.  Since we're all so big on SOS here, Dallas has a better SOS and that could very well be why they are 9-18.  If they played Rust's schedule who knows?!  Maybe they would do better than 13-11.

Quote from: Pat Coleman on March 01, 2009, 02:47:14 PM
It's hard to have a rational discussion with biased observers. It's unfortunate you lost to Dallas, a 9-18 team. Why could so many teams beat Dallas and Chapman not?

They didn't win because their guards went a combined 3-31 that game.  Their posts carried them up to the last shot of the game which happened to miss.  So one bad shooting game, specifically one shot, is keeping a team that is 24-3 out of the playoffs and probably letting a team 20-6 in... It is another sad day in D3Hoops.  This should be about who is the better team not who had a bad day against another team.  Plus, I really don't get why the Maryville team isn't getting the heat for getting blown out by Rust just like Chapman is getting the heat from U of D.  Again I know that supposedly the amount you win or lose by isn't counted, but you guys keep saying "results" so that makes me think it is.

Quote from: Pat Coleman on March 01, 2009, 02:11:26 AM
Maybe -- with that kind of record against regionally ranked teams you would be bound to have a good OWP. It would also be three wins against regionally ranked teams, which is more than the one any of the three teams on the proverbial board for the last Pool B slot this year could claim.

Ok see now I am getting the hang of how this whole thing works.  As said in an earlier post this is a flawed system but it is the one we are handed so everyone should deal accordingly. 

Quote from: Ralph Turner on March 01, 2009, 02:14:16 AM
Baol, you are even losing me now.

The hypothetical gets lost on the fact that we don't see that happening.

Chapman may have ended up with that, and it comes down to the fact that Chapman should not have lost the UDallas game. Instead of 13-0 in your hypothetical, Chapman was 12-1!

I saw UDallas play twice.  They lost by two points to Wells in the NEAC semis today.  Wells also has similar OWP.  Chapman needed to beat UDallas.  They did not, and I think that Maryville gets the 3rd Pool B because of that.

And LOL Ralph I'm sorry if that last one was confusing I knew it was going to be.  You seemed to have gotten the gist of it though.  I agree Chapman should not have lost to U of D, but they did win out from there on to get their name in tossed in the fray. 

The point I was trying to make with the hypothetical situation is that the system can be worked.  It seems like Maryville and Chapman played the game very similar ways, but the dice fell and it turned up snake eyes for Chapman (playing La Sierra on accident 3 extra times is snake eyes).  But does that mean that Maryville is a better team?  Their league is absolutely abysmal just as Chapman's schedule was, the only difference is a few teams in their region happened to lose this week and Chapman's region held strong and performed how it should have (with the exception of the last game between Puget Sound and Whitworth which actually seems to look back favorably upon Chapman). 

I guess all Chapman can do at this point is say their Hail Mary's and pray the committee views the two teams criterion as equal and on par with each other.  From there they can move down the list of qualifications and see Chapman is the stronger team that would perform stronger in the tournament.

By the way, I know it's not listed as one of the 5 steps to determine whether or not a team makes playoffs, but does the selection committee ever look at stats?  Like the fact that Chapman has the number one defense in the country?

Quote from: Pat Coleman on March 01, 2009, 01:53:07 AM
No, you're taking it and overreacting, and frankly, I don't have the time to debate someone who's going to distort off the deep end.

Nobody here is talking about putting a team with a .500 winning percentage in the tournament. We're talking about 17-3 vs. 16-6 vs. 16-7, three teams within two games of each other if you were looking at standings and one that played a significantly easier schedule to get to that record.

I don't mean to distort it at all and I apologize if I am, but that's how it seems.  When you throw out the term results it sounds like you get recognition for playing more games against good teams regardless of how you win or lose.  And if that is the case then teams should play the worst 13 teams in their region go 13-0 and play the best 10 teams in their region and possibly go 3-7.  Would that generate enough buzz with the committee?  Let's take a hypothetical situation and say that happened this year with University of Makebelieve.  At 16-7 with 3-7 against regionally ranked teams be enough to push out Chapman and Maryville and Susquehanna?

This is an honest hypothetical so I can understand the system better, and I know it looks like snotty sarcasm but I assure you it is not.

Quote from: Old School.... (Tom Doebler) on March 01, 2009, 01:44:40 AM
Are we guessing the 3 Pool Bs are:

Scranton from the Landmark
Maryville (TN) from GSAC
Chapman (independent)

No we know Elms and Scranton are in.

We are debating Maryville and Chapman since Susquehanna is slightly behind them since they just lost today.

Quote from: Pat Coleman on March 01, 2009, 01:46:04 AM

Quote from: Boal on March 01, 2009, 01:40:31 AM
  There is no way that a team should get in with a .500 record even if their SOS is number 1.  If you can't win the majority of your games no matter who you play you don't deserve to be going to the playoffs.  Am I all alone on this side of the argument?

You're twisting the argument beyond all recognition.

I apologize if I am, but that is the impression you're leaving me with.

Quote from: Pat Coleman on March 01, 2009, 01:34:03 AM
Boal, once again, the handbook does not say "winning percentage against regionally ranked teams," it says "results against regionally ranked teams."

Tis better to have played and lost than never to have played at all.

I know and I don't want to beat a dead horse here, but that can't possibly mean what you guys are implying it means.  If that were the case every team in America would try to schedule the top 25 teams in their region and roll the dice.  There is no way that a team should get in with a .500 record even if their SOS is number 1.  If you can't win the majority of your games no matter who you play you don't deserve to be going to the playoffs.  Am I all alone on this side of the argument?

Quote from: Pat Coleman on March 01, 2009, 12:56:10 AM
Last year isn't this year, either.

Also a great point.  2-3 last year might not have been good enough (obviously in the selection committees eyes it wasn't), and possibly 1-4 this year is.

But I don't see how 1-4 this year can be even remotely close to Chapman's 1-1 against Claremont and Whitworth (who just beat previously undefeated Puget Sound).

Quote from: Gregory Sager on March 01, 2009, 12:43:28 AM

Quote from: Boal on March 01, 2009, 12:37:45 AM

Quote from: Ralph Turner on March 01, 2009, 12:20:53 AM

Quote from: oldchap on March 01, 2009, 12:16:36 AM
Whitworth wins over UPS. Claremont over Pomona.

I would think that both results would help Chapman.

Yes, but Maryville has a "result" against the HCAC winner Transylvania, two "results" versus Centre which is in the SCAC finals, a win over Averett (the USA South Winner and a team that might be in the final unpublished regional rankings), and a win over VWC which is in the ODAC finals.

Maryville's resume has just gotten very impressive!

http://www.d3hoops.com/school/MVLT/mens/2009

See I'm very skeptical about this "results" thing going around.  You shouldn't get any recognition for playing and losing to a team.  And I think the committee agrees with me on this issue because last year Chapman had a "result" against  23-0 Plattsburg, a "result" against regionally ranked Oxy, two "results" against Cal Lu, a "result" against regionally ranked Whitworth and a "result" against PomonaPitzer.  All of these "results" gave Chapman a 2-4 record against regionally ranked opponents...  No games were blow outs so that's not an excuse as a 'bad' or 'poor' result. Yet Chapman missed the playoffs last year...

2-4 last year for Chapman sounds a lot better than 1-4 for Maryville this year.  And I think the selection committee is only impressed if you win those games, not that you played them closely.

The Chapman vs. Plattsburgh State game was irrelevant last season, since the two schools are not in the same region.

Ok I'm sorry, I guess they were 2-3 against regionally ranked teams in their region.  That would prove my case even further though, 2-3 is much better than a possible 1-4.

Quote from: Ralph Turner on March 01, 2009, 12:20:53 AM

Quote from: oldchap on March 01, 2009, 12:16:36 AM
Whitworth wins over UPS. Claremont over Pomona.

I would think that both results would help Chapman.

Yes, but Maryville has a "result" against the HCAC winner Transylvania, two "results" versus Centre which is in the SCAC finals, a win over Averett (the USA South Winner and a team that might be in the final unpublished regional rankings), and a win over VWC which is in the ODAC finals.

Maryville's resume has just gotten very impressive!

http://www.d3hoops.com/school/MVLT/mens/2009

See I'm very skeptical about this "results" thing going around.  You shouldn't get any recognition for playing and losing to a team.  And I think the committee agrees with me on this issue because last year Chapman had a "result" against  23-0 Plattsburg, a "result" against regionally ranked Oxy, two "results" against Cal Lu, a "result" against regionally ranked Whitworth and a "result" against PomonaPitzer.  All of these "results" gave Chapman a 2-4 record against regionally ranked opponents...  No games were blow outs so that's not an excuse as a 'bad' or 'poor' result. Yet Chapman missed the playoffs last year...

2-4 last year for Chapman sounds a lot better than 1-4 for Maryville this year.  And I think the selection committee is only impressed if you win those games, not that you played them closely.

Quote from: scottiedoug on March 01, 2009, 12:01:40 AM
Maryville has won 16 straight, after losing close games (2 on the road) to Centre (still playing for the SCAC title) and Transylvania (going to the tournament) and they beat VA Wesleyan (playing for the ODAC crown) and Averett (USA South champs).   Chapman beat and played who?  Susquehanna has 7 in-region losses.

I know that all this matters little in the criteria analysis, but if they want a team on a roll to represent the Bumblers well, Maryville is a nice fit.

16 straight is a great accomplishment, but Chapman won 16 straight two years ago and didn't even get a second look because of some key losses early in the season which Maryville also seems to have.  

Chapman this year has won 10 in a row and 20 out of their last 21.  Maryville's last 21 games leaves them with a record of 17-4 including a blow out loss to sub-par IND school Rust.  

As for who Chapman has beat and played... They beat Claremont who is the SCIAC champion and going to the tournament, they beat every single other SCIAC team they played with no exceptions, and they beat everyone they were supposed to beat with 2 exceptions in very, very close games.

Their regionally ranked opponents were Claremont and Whitworth.  Chapman beat Claremont and lost to Whitworth.  And on that note, Whitworth just won the NWC defeating previously undefeated (in D3) Puget Sound...

Chapman's one regional loss was to a team who just won the NWC by beating an undefeated team... I'd say that's a quality loss if there is such a thing.