I also hope that Gates is not hurt.  Does anyone know?  Going into the season, I know he had a good chance to break Swarthmore's scoring record.  Glancing at Swarthmore's statistics this year it looks like he was having some difficulty making shots consistently but he seems like a player that you let play through a shooting slump.   

The game should be an interesting one.  I think Porter's length and quickness combination could slow Toomey down(we'll see if he can regularly stay in front of Toomey though) and Milligan could also be effective against him.  I actually think F&M matches up defensively better with Toomey than Amherst does defensively with Milligan.  Toomey may be able to stay in front of Milligan but lacks the strength and length while Workman and Barrise may struggle because while they long, they are not as quick laterally.  On the other hand, outside of matching up with each team's top player, I think most of the other match ups will favor the Jeffs.  This game could very well come down to which team has second and third guys step up and play well.  I think F&M can win the game at home but they may need to knock down a few early jumpers to open up the post and driving lanes a bit.

Quote from: centfan on March 04, 2012, 01:41:59 AM
congrats to F&M. i don't think they will get past amherst but it is possible. i saw toomey play tonight (point) for amherst and he is very good. i think he is a better offensive player than milligan. that matchup should be interesting. i also think that amherst plays a bit bigger and stronger inside than F&M. we shall see.

Toomey is not the athlete Milligan is (particularly strength wise), but I agree that he is a more polished offensive player.  It will be interesting to see how he does against the F&M guards who are fairly long and quick.  Amherst has the power advantage inside but F&M's bigs have been playing very well lately.  I would give Amherst the advantage but F&M matches up with them pretty well.  Despite their high ranking, this Amherst team has not been as impressive as their championship and runner-up teams several years ago (that being said they could still be a Final Four team).  I hope it will be a good game.  I'd like to see the best of the CC beat the NESCAC's best.

Quote from: sunny on February 28, 2012, 09:00:51 AM

Quote from: crambam on February 28, 2012, 08:51:33 AM
I'm still at a loss to figure out why the Amherst men would have to move.  It makes no sense. 

Financially, if they charge, there's no way the men wouldn't outsell the women. 

They should either move the women's start time, or move the women. 

Could anyone imagine the Knicks moving venues because the Liberty want the court?

It's absolute silliness.  The Amherst men earned a seeding, and to lose it because of the women's team is just ridiculous.

Don't get me wrong, I'm glad this is happening because it could potentially help F&M, but this is not justice.

If this WAS F&M in this position, I'd be angry as hell.

It's called equality. Frankly, I can't think of anything more fair in DIVISION III than, in a situation where one team HAS to not host that the team with the better overall season be the one who gets to play at home.

And let's not go comparing the gate receipt difference of Amherst's men's and women's games to that of the Knicks and Liberty.  Seriously? Remember, the Division III basketball tournament isn't a money-maker anyway.

It could end up being a non-issue, but I also think it is unfortunate that one of the Amherst teams may have to move.  I agree with Sunny though, that given the current rules the undefeated and #1 ranked women should get to host in this situation.  You have to give Amherst a lot of credit for having both teams in such a great position. It is too bad that Amherst is not allowed to find a way to host both or use the nearby facilities at Mt. Holyoke or Smith to host, so that they still have a home crowd and distance advantage rather than playing a host in their gym.  The rule as it stands does not make all that much sense.  I'm not even going to respond to most of what crambam wrote.  I'm sure the rest of the F&M fans on this board are embarrassed enough by it.

Quote from: Swat Dad on February 21, 2012, 09:28:02 PM
Gabriel - I think you are correct. However, he is not the only player to be doubled and tripled this year. Now that I have had time to let it settle, I think the list is spot on. The coaches know the whole story and get it right most of the time.

Anyone else think Georgio could have played DI? I coached a player who starts on a DI team and Georgio is a much better player. In fact, not even close. I was just wondering what others thought about him.

I definitely thought he could have played D1 even as a freshman.  His offensive game has developed in college but athletically he was a D1 talent for sure with his size, speed, and skill at the PG position. I was surprised to see a player like him from a quality league like Don Bosco's end up in D3.  He was not a major D1 type of player out of high school but he could probably start for many low- to mid-majors right now.  As a freshman, he was similar to a former teammate of mine who had a decent career in the Sun Belt (when that player was a senior in high school) but was not nearly at the level of another Pac-12 teammate.

I was pleased to see Goldberg, who I mistakenly indicated would be back next year (I meant Baker in that context for Haverford), get first team.  He really impressed me with how he raised the playing levels of the people around him (something that distinguished him from some of the second team players).  I think Ward was deserving but the CC voting does often take into account career accomplishments.  Ward received a lot of attention from defenses and was still effective.  I also think the league got it right giving Gates second team rather than HM for the same reason.  He faced full denials and double teams and still played well. 

Coach Nelson is very deserving of coach of the year.  It has been an impressive turnaround for JHU this year.

Congrats to all the players, Coach Nelson, and any of you, like Swat Dad, who had sons or friends who were honored!

Quote from: Swat Dad on February 20, 2012, 08:56:05 PM
I'm going with F&M over the Muhls for the championship.

I hope the league does the right thing and make Georgio and Liddic co-MVP's.  They both deserve it after having brilliant years and careers!

So my picks

First team: GM, SL, KB, GW, and HG
Second team: JW, WG, MK, IG, and AZ
Honorable mention: AH, CB, LS-G, a Hopkins player and one other.

I am sure about GM, SL, and KB - could go with any second teamers as first team.

I largely agree with you.  I'd like to put your son on the 2nd team because that is where he is as an overall player (I hope he gets the nod there), but I think HM may be likely due to the team's record, his shooting %, and his slightly lower point, %, and rebound numbers in the CC versus non-conference games.  I predict he could have a very big senior year depending on the coaching situation.  Gates and Goldberg could lead Swat and HC to significantly better seasons next year depending on who they are able to bring in.

As for the playoff matchups, I am hoping for an upset or two.  I think if a CC team other than F&M wins the league, we could actually get two teams out of the first round of the NCAAs (probably not out of the first weekend though).  I really can't see any of the top teams nationally wanting to play F&M if they end up seeded poorly, especially given their experience.

Would someone mind describing what goes into the Regional Rankings and their importance to NCAA selection?  I am only vaguely familiar with them.

What do people think about F&M being only 5th in the regional rankings?  Looks like their strength of schedule hurt them but the CC sure isn't getting much respect.

Quote from: CCHoopster on February 08, 2012, 02:22:21 PM

Quote from: CCHoopster on February 08, 2012, 02:21:20 PM

Quote from: ddm1027 on February 05, 2012, 01:11:43 PM
Were there enough fans to fully blanket even 3/4 of the court?  I would be impressed it there was a real court storming!  I see no problem with it when you beat a team at home that is a large favorite.  F&M fans should be pleased that their team is good enough to warrant a court storming.  Do you think anyone rushes the court when they beat McDaniel or Dickinson?

Marcus Denmon's quotation last night after Mizzou beat Kansas and he stopped students from running on the court was very telling: "We know Kansas is a great team but we're at home and we expect to win."

http://rivals.yahoo.com/ncaa/basketball/blog/the_dagger/post/Marcus-Denmon-topples-Kansas-then-stops-a-court?urn=ncaab-wp8196&active_dimension=carousel_ept_sports_blog&ysp_frm_woah=1

The MC-F&M game was not a case, like the KU match-up, where the game was thought of as something close to a true toss up going into it, so I think they should be able to celebrate a bit.

That is an irrelevant link, comment ect in regards to rushing the court. Why in the heck would a team ranked top 5 rush the court after beating another top ranked team. It was logic and common sense to not rush the court- Would make Mizzou look like they didnt deserve or expect to beat KU. No ranked team should rush the court after beating another ranked team when your seperated by a ranking place or two. Especially in January.

The post was more to convey that I'm all for letting the college kids have a little fun when it isn't completely inappropriate.   It was also to show the disparity in the league between F&M and Muhlenburg (and the others in the CC) that the teams and students seem to feel.  Despite some of the talk on the board about how anyone can beat anyone (which can occasionally happen, see Swarthmore beating Washington), even the team that may very well be the second most talented team in the league had their fans rush the court after beating F&M (and didn't have anyone trying to stop it like Mizzou). 

As for Missouri, the fans did the right thing but I would have thought about storming the court given they had just beaten a team that has won the league 7 straight times in the regular season, beaten them 5 times in a row and 10 of the last 11, and won what could reasonably be the last KU-Mizzou game at Missouri, a series that started in 1907, for at least the foreseeable future in a pretty crazy comeback.

Quote from: CCHoopster on February 08, 2012, 02:22:21 PM

Quote from: CCHoopster on February 08, 2012, 02:21:20 PM

Quote from: ddm1027 on February 05, 2012, 01:11:43 PM
Were there enough fans to fully blanket even 3/4 of the court?  I would be impressed it there was a real court storming!  I see no problem with it when you beat a team at home that is a large favorite.  F&M fans should be pleased that their team is good enough to warrant a court storming.  Do you think anyone rushes the court when they beat McDaniel or Dickinson?

Marcus Denmon's quotation last night after Mizzou beat Kansas and he stopped students from running on the court was very telling: "We know Kansas is a great team but we're at home and we expect to win."

http://rivals.yahoo.com/ncaa/basketball/blog/the_dagger/post/Marcus-Denmon-topples-Kansas-then-stops-a-court?urn=ncaab-wp8196&active_dimension=carousel_ept_sports_blog&ysp_frm_woah=1

The MC-F&M game was not a case, like the KU match-up, where the game was thought of as something close to a true toss up going into it, so I think they should be able to celebrate a bit.

That is an irrelevant link, comment ect in regards to rushing the court. Why in the heck would a team ranked top 5 rush the court after beating another top ranked team. It was logic and common sense to not rush the court- Would make Mizzou look like they didnt deserve or expect to beat KU. No ranked team should rush the court after beating another ranked team when your seperated by a ranking place or two. Especially in January.

Stats are for fans. Last month Kobe bryant had something like 4 straight games of 40 plus and they lost all four.

The Lakers have won 75%+ of their games in which Kobe drops 40+ (an impressive 111 games).  They also didn't lose all of those games in January (but that is beside the point).  Stats being for fans may have been largely true fifteen years ago but that is definitely not the case anymore (for a surface view of this, check out Moneyball).  There is a large yearly conference at MIT on Sports Analytics that was mentioned in the SI article on MIT and Middlebury and the industry is quickly growing at the pro and college levels.  Even in D-III player efficiency and +/- stats strongly influence substitution patterns and playing time.  You do actually have to score to win but it is true that fans often concentrate too much on scoring stats and stats alone don't always tell the whole story. 

Were there enough fans to fully blanket even 3/4 of the court?  I would be impressed it there was a real court storming!  I see no problem with it when you beat a team at home that is a large favorite.  F&M fans should be pleased that their team is good enough to warrant a court storming.  Do you think anyone rushes the court when they beat McDaniel or Dickinson?

Marcus Denmon's quotation last night after Mizzou beat Kansas and he stopped students from running on the court was very telling: "We know Kansas is a great team but we're at home and we expect to win."

http://rivals.yahoo.com/ncaa/basketball/blog/the_dagger/post/Marcus-Denmon-topples-Kansas-then-stops-a-court?urn=ncaab-wp8196&active_dimension=carousel_ept_sports_blog&ysp_frm_woah=1

The MC-F&M game was not a case, like the KU match-up, where the game was thought of as something close to a true toss up going into it, so I think they should be able to celebrate a bit.

I think we'll see the CC expand the tournament at some point.  It will probably take a few years of having teams tied for 5th or even 5th-7th and needing to resort to multiple tiebreakers to set the field.  It seemed like this is probably what happened when the 5th team was added (a reactionary rather than fully thought out move by the league and ADs).  Everyone has to agree that adding just a fifth team did not make any real sense.  On the men's side it could be argued that the top half of teams make the playoffs but that does not hold true for the women (who have 11 teams with BMC).  If the CC really wanted to value the regular season so much (as a poster suggested), it should follow the Ivy League and just allow the regular season conference champion to go to the NCAAs (I would rather expand than contract).  Given the "love" F&M has been getting on the board in the last day, I don't think most of the board really wants to value the regular season all that much either.

Harvard has been more aggressive recruiting and has been admitting players they probably wouldn't have before Amaker arrived: http://www.nytimes.com/2008/03/02/sports/ncaabasketball/02harvard.html.

It will take a similar combination for the top three academic schools in the CC to regularly be at the top of the league in men's basketball.  As the teams get a lot better, the campus support at those places is likely to follow to at least a certain degree (look at soccer at JHU and Swarthmore over the last several years for examples of this).

One of the biggest differences I remember attendance wise was that all of the Haverford, Swarthmore, and Hopkins parents were not at every game (some did come but many did not live within a reasonable driving distance to always be there).  Sadly, you really notice 15-25 loud parents at games at most venues in the Centennial.  F&M and Ursinus have had pretty good crowds over the last several years but not most of the rest of the league.  I agree with others that the fans who do come are generally very good (like many of you).  Lets be honest about most Division III programs though, they are not getting huge support from the local community outside the college.  Even Amherst, whose games I went to regularly the year they finished 2nd (and the year after they won it all), did not get many fans and had far less campus support than I expected (fewer fans than F&M for sure except when Amherst played Williams). 
Amherst and Williams (and Middlebury and MIT) are slightly more relaxed with admissions (ask the coaches or ADs at Haverford or Swarthmore about this), but it still takes a lot to get in.  However, lets also not kid ourselves with Haverford, Hopkins, and Swarthmore either; they are not like Caltech, who only takes players who would get in without assistance (and an applicant's basketball experience is treated by the admissions office like being a good dancer).  Recruited athletes still get more than a little edge in admissions at these great schools, and other Centennial schools as well, as it is.  Getting into them is significantly more difficult though than getting into an Ivy as a recruit (where they use the AI).  I was recruited to play another sport in the Ivy League and received special applications and an estimated aid package before even applying.  You can look at an article on Ivy recruiting and the AI here: http://www.nytimes.com/2011/12/25/sports/before-athletic-recruiting-in-the-ivy-league-some-math.html?pagewanted=all
I agree with "sunny" that Hopkins has done a far better job than Swarthmore and Haverford.  Overall, they clearly have the best athletic department in the CC (though their best programs are outside the CC).  Hopkins has been in the top 13 for the D-III Director's Cup the last two years.  Nonetheless, the basketball program has not been a national player at all in recent memory and they have some of the worst attendance in the league.