Whatever, I can't win.

I try to do something unique and get no credit for it. But when I dare look at our lords and saviors rather than averting my eyes, I get -k - bombed. I don't really care, just pointing out the fact.

All I know is that there are a lot of people that agree with me, on this board and off. I'm not going to say who because I don't want to see them vilified like I have been here. But I'm done trying, I've said what I have to say and it's obvious that no one is willing to consider anything different than their opinion even in the face of more than a decade of evidence.

This year the country is more imbalanced than ever. There's hardly an eastern team in the top 10 in the country in either the F50 or Massey. The ARC is getting the respect they've deserved for a long time bc of NWU's success, to go with the annual quality in the other power leagues.

I'll put money on for whoever wants to go against it that the first time a NESCAC team faces a CCIW, WIAC, MIAC or ARC team, they'll lose. I doubt they even make it that far, much like the last couple of years.

If you're game, message me. Otherwise, I'm out. I don't need this abuse from people that claim themselves to be uber-worthy of respect and adoration in D3.

Enjoy the tournament everyone. I hope the committee sets it up so the best teams have a chance to advance to play each other, or be denied the opportunity on the court in a fair bracket, rather than having to battle just to get out of the first weekend. I hope, I don't expect.

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on February 20, 2019, 05:24:29 PM

And from my experience covering this sport ... I'll take NESCAC teams over a lot of the rest of the country more times than not. They have proven that pretty well over the years. They aren't going to beat everyone, but I don't understand how you can't see they have proven themselves over the years.

And the last part ... not part of the criteria. Stick to the criteria. A game (or how many) over .500 in any conference isn't a factor at all.

It's not part of the criteria, but you're fooling yourself if you think it doesn't matter for other leagues. It's exactly the reason you all criticize the Oshkosh Pool C when that was actually justified bc they were a good team with a great schedule that had been in the annually toughest league in the country. It's why you say (probably correctly) that Stevens Point has no chance, that Platteville has no chance, that Whitewater has no chance. But if those records were 6-4 or 4-6 rather than having a few more losses and padding the non-conference, then they'd have every chance. And I know you aren't gonna go and say Wesleyan played a tougher schedule than Stevens Point.

Maybe I hate them, maybe I just hate the bias toward them. But I definitely hate that they get so much preferential treatment they haven't earned at the cost of better teams.

Again, what's it been 15 years since any of them got past a WIAC, CCIW or MIAC team in the tournament? Maybe I'm forgetting one out of a bunch, but I know it's not many.

But you think they've proven themselves because sometimes they get out of the east (not even done that as much lately), which really just shows how deep the eastern bias goes.

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on February 20, 2019, 04:54:04 PM

Quote from: SaintPaulite on February 20, 2019, 04:44:27 PM
The regional rankings in New England continue to be biased toward the NESCAC. Lot of people on that committee with either current or former NESCAC ties. No real reason for Wesleyan or Colby to be in it other than to pump up the NESCAC resumes. 

Mass-Dartmouth should be in a position where if they beat ECSU they should be ahead of them, but they probably aren't in that position.

Wondering if the national committee will do some reworking of that.

Elsewhere, IWU blocked by Stevens Point who probably has to win the WIAC to get in. Wabash looks like they need to beat Wittenberg or they're out.

NOT. HOW. IT. WORKS. I can't tell you how many people tell me how coaches, admins, etc. check their allegiances and ties at the door and talk about these things on merit. If they didn't, they would either be called out on it by their colleagues or the NCAA liaison.

The NESCAC has strong numbers, but if the bias was there and we were working in the former days, Wesleyan would be a LOT higher. Wesleyan has a very, very strong SOS and that will keep them in play. In past years, they would be in the Top 5.

National Committee looks at the regional rankings each and every week and I can tell you for sure they are making sure the regions are using the data accordingly ... and making changes when needed. If something is off to them, they change it before we see it posted.

So the national committee or the NCAA has never redone regional rankings before? I'm pretty sure you yourself have said otherwise.

NESCAC SOS's are crap. They're inflated and we know that. Look at who they've actually played and beaten. Mostly they get credit for beating other NESCAC teams. This is why they need to be forced to play a longer conference season, because they can be mediocre against each other and it's like but they only played 10 conference games, only had one game against whoever, etc. And then people look at the inflated SOS. Whereas being .500 or a game over .500 in any other conference is a strike against you, one way or another.

We need a committee with the guts to say no we're not falling for it anymore. Sam sounded like this might be the committee, but the regional rankings don't reflect it so far. LOL 6 of the 8 teams are ranked from the Massey #4 conference. The WIAC, ARC and CCIW should just all get Pool C's by default in that case.

The regional rankings in New England continue to be biased toward the NESCAC. Lot of people on that committee with either current or former NESCAC ties. No real reason for Wesleyan or Colby to be in it other than to pump up the NESCAC resumes. 

Mass-Dartmouth should be in a position where if they beat ECSU they should be ahead of them, but they probably aren't in that position.

Wondering if the national committee will do some reworking of that.

Elsewhere, IWU blocked by Stevens Point who probably has to win the WIAC to get in. Wabash looks like they need to beat Wittenberg or they're out.

Loras up to 3rd in the West puts them in very solid position to host, especially since the #4 (UST) likely can't.

Quote from: Pat Coleman on February 20, 2019, 04:08:19 PM

Quote from: SaintPaulite on February 20, 2019, 03:36:28 PM

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on February 20, 2019, 02:23:51 PM

Quote from: SaintPaulite on February 20, 2019, 02:11:33 PM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on February 20, 2019, 02:05:04 PM

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on February 20, 2019, 01:58:54 PM
Championship weekend is usually not considered in any season.

Confirming for folks that we were told this for football as well. Whether the Texas Stagg would have potentially required one flight or two, it wasn't counted against the total flights projected for the bracket.

Doesn't it seem like that's wrong, though? In Salem, you usually had 1 team within 500 miles (Mount Union) and 1 not. Is flying an additional team suddenly free because it's later in the tournament? A damn world of difference between traveling a football team and a basketball team too. You could probably fly half the tournament for what it costs to travel a football team.

Look at it as two different budgets. There is a budget for the tournament. There is a budget for the final four. They don't impact each other.

Usually football is the costliest tournament each year to run ... men's and women's basketball the next costliest.

I wonder how this will change now that baseball has gone to super regional format.

The softball people said they actually saved a small amount of money this way. When you think of it, in the regionals, at most eight teams were hosting and playing at home and everyone else was incurring hotel nights, sometimes four of them. In the new format, 25% of the first-weekend teams and 50% of the second-weekend teams will be hosting, and they will be hosting shorter tournaments. And doing so on-campus. Obviously, some of that is offset by the fact that, essentially, eight teams will travel twice before the finals weekend.

Good points. Having postseason baseball in St. Paul would be pretty cool, I would rather see it at CHS rather than on campus, though that won't happen this year with the Saints schedule. Might be interesting to see postseason baseball with the cavernous outfield at UST, though.

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on February 20, 2019, 03:36:37 PM
The third public NCAA Division III regional rankings are out: https://www.d3hoops.com/notables/2019/02/men-regional-rankings-third

How far do we reckon Marietta fell? Surely behind Wooster and Capital at least now, if not Wittenberg also.

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on February 20, 2019, 02:23:51 PM

Quote from: SaintPaulite on February 20, 2019, 02:11:33 PM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on February 20, 2019, 02:05:04 PM

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on February 20, 2019, 01:58:54 PM
Championship weekend is usually not considered in any season.

Confirming for folks that we were told this for football as well. Whether the Texas Stagg would have potentially required one flight or two, it wasn't counted against the total flights projected for the bracket.

Doesn't it seem like that's wrong, though? In Salem, you usually had 1 team within 500 miles (Mount Union) and 1 not. Is flying an additional team suddenly free because it's later in the tournament? A damn world of difference between traveling a football team and a basketball team too. You could probably fly half the tournament for what it costs to travel a football team.

Look at it as two different budgets. There is a budget for the tournament. There is a budget for the final four. They don't impact each other.

Usually football is the costliest tournament each year to run ... men's and women's basketball the next costliest.

I wonder how this will change now that baseball has gone to super regional format.

Quote from: Pat Coleman on February 20, 2019, 03:22:50 PM
It's really better to have 3-seed hosts than 2-seed hosts, which is unfortunate because Loras is ideally located to help the committee. A 2-seed host could be close enough to the best team in a pod that the home court pushes them over, where that's less likely with a 3-seed host.

Doesn't seem like that's how it's actually been done, though, at least in the last few brackets.

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on February 20, 2019, 03:19:03 PM
They are in someone's mock top 16 ... not necessarily the national committee's Top 16.

Drew's, to be specific.

It's not hard to reckon why they are with the wins they have. And everyone down in that range have taken a few losses.

But it doesn't really help much if you say that Emory or someone is in the top 16 instead. Basically Marietta fell out which is a pretty easily reachable location, and they're likely replaced by someone less central.

EDIT TO ADD: Loras up to 3rd in the West regional rankings, btw. So apparently Drew isn't the only one that (likely) has them top 16 nationally. But hey, what would we do without pointless snark?

In a related story to all of this, as a result of Tuesday's results, it's even more difficult to put together a seed-true bracket, because Loras is now in the top 16, so rather than using them as a 2 seed host, they're actually positioned such that they should be a host unless geography prevents it. Pomona-Pitzer is also top 16 (they were before as well), which is why if the committee was willing to pair them and Emory rather than Whitman, it would really help the competitive balance in the bracket.

Even at this, without having a couple of extra 2 seed hosts for geography reasons, it gets very difficult to see how you slot in the 3 and 4 seeds in a pod.

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on February 20, 2019, 02:23:51 PM

Quote from: SaintPaulite on February 20, 2019, 02:11:33 PM

Quote from: Pat Coleman on February 20, 2019, 02:05:04 PM

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on February 20, 2019, 01:58:54 PM
Championship weekend is usually not considered in any season.

Confirming for folks that we were told this for football as well. Whether the Texas Stagg would have potentially required one flight or two, it wasn't counted against the total flights projected for the bracket.

Doesn't it seem like that's wrong, though? In Salem, you usually had 1 team within 500 miles (Mount Union) and 1 not. Is flying an additional team suddenly free because it's later in the tournament? A damn world of difference between traveling a football team and a basketball team too. You could probably fly half the tournament for what it costs to travel a football team.

Look at it as two different budgets. There is a budget for the tournament. There is a budget for the final four. They don't impact each other.

Usually football is the costliest tournament each year to run ... men's and women's basketball the next costliest.

That's extremely stupid though, because the final four is part of the tournament.

If you spend less for the final four, logically you should have more to spend on the rest of the tournament. Anything else is military-level budget inefficiency.

Quote from: KnightSlappy on February 20, 2019, 02:18:28 PM
My suggestion for fully funding a D3 basketball bracket is to end D3 football (the sport, not the dot com). It's not real anyway (because if it was real, Calvin would have it).

Or just advance the top seeds in each bracket to the semifinals and start there. So basically like D1 only without the pointless post-season exhibitions.

Quote from: Pat Coleman on February 20, 2019, 02:05:04 PM

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on February 20, 2019, 01:58:54 PM
Championship weekend is usually not considered in any season.

Confirming for folks that we were told this for football as well. Whether the Texas Stagg would have potentially required one flight or two, it wasn't counted against the total flights projected for the bracket.

Doesn't it seem like that's wrong, though? In Salem, you usually had 1 team within 500 miles (Mount Union) and 1 not. Is flying an additional team suddenly free because it's later in the tournament? A damn world of difference between traveling a football team and a basketball team too. You could probably fly half the tournament for what it costs to travel a football team.

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on February 20, 2019, 01:58:54 PM
Championship weekend is usually not considered in any season. Flight potential is understood and usually does not impact the rest of the bracket. I have never been told that a concern about who might or might not have to fly to Salem limited flights earlier in the event.

That said, I think it is an interesting question to raise about Fort Wayne ... though teams form the east coast are more likely to fly (though, some teams still had to fly to Salem). If they feel less flights may be needed, would that open up the bracket earlier ... I'll ask. I suspect they will say it doesn't affect anything, but I'll ask.

If they set up the bracket close to fairly, there probably won't be as many east coast teams in it, at least this year. But New England teams were more than 500 miles from Salem anyway. Basically unless you were in NJ, VA, OH or PA (or Emory, dunno if they ever made it, not really the point anyway), you were more than 500 miles from Salem.

It's highly likely that there will be more closer trips to Fort Wayne than Salem, and that should be considered.

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on February 20, 2019, 11:55:17 AM

Quote from: Gregory Sager on February 15, 2019, 03:51:39 PM
My attempts at trying to read between the lines whenever Dave has a national committee member on Hoopsville lead me to believe that they value the criteria and the regional rankings right up to the last dollar available to them ... but no further. They value them enough, in fact, to try to reward an obvious #1 seed such as Whitman whenever possible, so that if there's a couple of flights available within the budget they wouldn't hesitate to fly two Texas teams to Walla Walla. At the same time, though, there's no guarantees that bracketing requirements won't use up whatever extra flights are available, so if there aren't any extra flights the Blues will be on a plane to the Lone Star State even though they deserve better.

Is that a fair reading of what I keep hearing on Hoopsville, Dave?

Correct way of understanding it. I feel from what I've been told on and off the air that they are going to do their best to create as balanced a bracket as they can and use the flights they are afforded to the best of their ability. However, they had the same plan last year before Texas schools threw a curve ball on them and forced them in a different direction.

They are going try and reward Whitman, but I would also say they are going to try and be creative. I wouldn't be surprised if maybe we see something different in the first round - maybe send Whitman on the road - to create other options later.

The biggest key to remember is the NCAA liaison will look at the potential flights in the second weekend as well - even if they may be a bit far fetched - and ask for things to be adjusted. So, the committee can't completely come up with crazy scenarios and then hold their breathe.

Will the NCAA liaison look at the potential flights on the third weekend compared to the Salem years, and factor that into their tolerance for first and second weekend flights?

They could avoid things like having Whitman (high 1 seed), Pomona-Pitzer (low 1) and UT-Dallas (mid 2) in the same bracket, but it will take some added tolerance for flights.

By the snake bracket, UT-Dallas would be more like a 2 in Whitman's bracket than a 3, and Pomona-Pitzer shouldn't even be considered as a possible 2 in that bracket. I'm using Drew's national top 100 here for who should be considered what.