MBB: Southern California Intercollegiate Athletic Conference

[Pat Coleman]

You can think what you like. If you look at more than one All-Region team you will find we are hardly slaves to GGFFC.

[OxyBob]

Wow, the all region teams came out...good stuff.  Except for the names on them...at least the West region teams.  Really??? 

Beefs about all-conference and all-region teams are kind of silly, aren't they? You can debate all day long about who is on the teams and who isn't. D3hoops picked the all-region teams. All of the players chosen are worthy of that honor, so congratulations to the players who made each team.

OxyBob

[dahlby]

I agree with OxyBob, if you don't like D3's selection, or anyones else's for that matter,
create your own all-star team and post it. We will see if everyone agrees with your choices.

Plus K for Bob for writing what many posters were probably thinking!

[WoostAr]

Pat, you can turn the comments around however you want, or maybe you just dont understand, so let me list it out for you.

2.  Evidently, you do not have faith in the coaches' ability to judge talent, since you allowed a player to be named All-Region by SIDs despite the fact that player wasnt even selected as an all conference player.  I am sure there are much better players in the region that are more deserving....maybe even from his own team, since one of his teammates did make All conference.  Sympathy votes need not apply.

I assume you are referring to Ryan Elmquist in this statement....just as an FYI he did receive the conference Ducey award which is rather highly regarded in the SCIAC....highly likely that they wanted to acknowledge another player instead of a single player twice....for evidence of this, the player of the year wasn't technically all-conference either. (see list)

http://www.thesciac.org/sports/mbkb/2010-11/news/ALL_SCIAC

Also, I believe the SCIAC coaches are swayed in their voting by number of team wins....personally I think Grimm should have taken Player of the Year based solely on talent.

[Fan O SCIAC]

I want to take a survey.  Does anybody find it objectionable that Whitworth's star player, conference MVP, national POY, is a senior transfer?  Attending the school for just a single year.  All the quality private schools, college or high school, I am aware of do not give out diplomas with their name on it to students who make only a fleeting appearance at the school.  Sounds like a mercenary.  While it's obviously allowed, is it not a violation of the principle of the "student athlete" that DIII schools tout as being so important?  I'm fairly new to the SCIAC, is this late transfer philosphy practiced within our conference?

[Pat Coleman]

If you knew the back story you'd probably take back your vitriol.

Michael has two cousins who play for Whitworth and married a Whitworth women's basketball player last summer. Why spend your senior year traipsing all around the Big Sky Conference?

Most Division I-to-Division III transfers play key roles with their teams but someone dropping out of the sky and being dominant in D-III is actually fairly rare.

[Gregory Sager]

If you knew the back story you'd probably take back your vitriol.

Michael has two cousins who play for Whitworth and married a Whitworth women's basketball player last summer. Why spend your senior year traipsing all around the Big Sky Conference?

Most Division I-to-Division III transfers play key roles with their teams but someone dropping out of the sky and being dominant in D-III is actually fairly rare.

Unfortunately, Pat, Fan O's post appears to be making judgments far more insidious than that. He's clearly insulting not only Taylor and the Whitworth program but the school itself ("All the quality private schools ...").

Fan O, your "facts" are badly out of whack. Please demonstrate via links that "quality private schools, college or high school," require a student to spend most of his or her matriculation period at said school in order to earn a diploma. I think that if you check around you'll find that just about every private college or university, Whitworth included, has a minimum number of terminal credit hours that have to be earned at that school in order to receive a bachelors degree. It's therefore incumbent upon you to prove that Whitworth is skirting its own policy and is awarding a degree to Michael Taylor short of his earning whatever number of terminal credit hours at Whitworth that the school requires as stated in its course catalog.

Here's some other things that you did not address:

1. Taylor may have additional classwork left after this school year adjourns in order to earn his Whitworth degree. That's not unusual for a transfer student. You, however, have taken on the assumption that he is merely spending one year there ("attending the school for just a single year" and "a fleeting appearance"), based upon his lone season with the Pirates. You know what they say about people who assume ...

2. This has nothing to do with NCAA rules, as you admit that there is no likely violation on Whitworth's part in having Taylor play for the Pirates for one year. But you clearly do not understand how D3 works, since you aver to "the principle of the 'student athlete' that D3 schools tout as being so important" without ever making plain what sort of "principle" a student-athlete who is academically qualified and who is enrolled and paying for his schooling is violating by participating in sports.

3. Mercenaries are paid for what they do. Michael Taylor pays to attend Whitworth (and thus he paid to play basketball for the Pirates).

Snobbery and ignorance are a bad combination.

[OxyBob]

Fan O, your "facts" are badly out of whack.

Having facts out of whack is an occupational hazard of sports dads. It's probably OK with him if Claremont has transfers -- Cody Mivshek, Patrick Lacey, Michael Bagby, to name 3 off the top of my head -- but it's not OK if Whitworth does.

OxyBob

[Gregory Sager]

Fan O, your "facts" are badly out of whack.

Having facts out of whack is an occupational hazard of sports dads. It's probably OK with him if Claremont has transfers -- Cody Mivshek, Patrick Lacey, Michael Bagby, to name 3 off the top of my head -- but it's not OK if Whitworth does.

OxyBob

I wasn't going to go there, as I know a lot of fair-minded and reasonable parents whose kids play or have played D3 basketball, but I will say this: If there's any guilt-by-association that comes out of Fan O's calumny-laden post, it's likely to be directed at the CMS program and a certain sophomore-to-be Stags guard rather than at the Whitworth program and Michael Taylor, as unfair and unfortunate as that may be.

[Fan O SCIAC]

To Pat Coleman, as well as Michael Taylor, I will begin with an apology.  After re-reading my post today I realize it was completely inappropriate.  I cringed as I read it.  Mr. Taylor, while I was unaware of your familial connection to Whitworth, it should not have even mattered.  I had no right to use you in an attempt to start a general topical discussion.  I hope you will accept my apology. Like the little boy digging through the manure of my post, I hope you will find the pony of a complement: You had an amazing season.  I wish you all the best with your new wife.  Mr. Coleman, I thank you for your measured response.  Allowing for the possibility that my poorly expressed, inappropriately worded mis-comunication might be rectified made it all the more possible.  I wish I could take back my vitriol, unfortunately it is there in black & white for all to see.  The best I can do is offer my most sincere apology and a promise, after this, to never post again after 10PM.

[(509)Rat]

Not to pile on, but I wanted to point out that most "good" DIII athletes in any sport had opportunities to take scholarship money to play elsewhere. At least that's how it was for many of us at Whitworth. Those individuals chose to play DIII because they realized there was something more important than sports. For me it was an opportunity to be more competitive when applying to grad schools, for others it's an opportunity to be involved in other activities (music, ministry, resident life, etc.), for Michael Taylor it was an opportunity to not only be in the same city as his wife and play with his cousins, but to also have his family (and I mean EVERYONE) able to see him play nearly every game in this final season. 

We all have different priorities in life. If you are talented enough then athletics is a great priority to have (no knock on DI, revenue generating athletes from me). People need to realize that the "priorites" of a DIII athlete vary greatly, but (for the most part) are all equally justifiable and honorable. For anyone to question the motives of a DIII athlete or institution is simply ignorant.

Congrats to Michael Taylor for the unforgettable season. And more importantly, coming from a former Pirate who married a Pirate long ago, Congrats on stepping up to the plate in terms of being a husband.

[Fan O SCIAC]

Well said!!! No piling on just more well articulated information and perspective. As I said previously, I had no right to use Mr. Taylor, or Whitworth, in the posting of a question for which I truly wanted more insight but was clearly biased, no, make that ignorant. It takes a very open mind and accepting heart to respond as you and Mr. Coleman have. The result is my greater understanding of, and appreciation for, Mr. Taylor and Whitworth. Congratulations to Mr. Taylor and the whole Whitworth program for a tremendous season and thank you for enlightening me.

[(509)Rat]

Philosophically, Fan O SCIAC's question wasn't all bad.

It's all hypothetical, but what if a program was taking 1 and done type transfers who did NOT fit in with the mission statement of that particular institution? ie PLU takes Venoy Overton from UW, who leads them to a conference championship and national tourney appearance?

Then does it become objectionable?

[Gregory Sager]

Fan O, not a lot of posters would have stepped up to the plate and posted an apology like that. I respect you for doing so. Kudos, sir.

Philosophically, Fan O SCIAC's question wasn't all bad.

It's all hypothetical, but what if a program was taking 1 and done type transfers who did NOT fit in with the mission statement of that particular institution? ie PLU takes Venoy Overton from UW, who leads them to a conference championship and national tourney appearance?

Then does it become objectionable?

I'm not sure what you mean by "fit in with the mission statement of that particular institution" -- are we talking about another Jim-McMahon-at-BYU type of thing, or is this about admitting transfer students who are academically unqualified, or what? The "one and done" thing makes me think that we're still talking about the Michael Taylor types who only transfer in for one season of eligibility, but the "mission statement" thing makes me wonder if you're talking about something else besides that.

It's a perfectly reasonable topic, but I guess that I'd just like to see you flesh out the question a little more, as I'm not quite sure that I follow the "mission statement" aspect of it, and I don't want to post a response while I'm in danger of misunderstanding you.

[(509)Rat]

Here's Whitworth's...

"Whitworth University is a private, residential, liberal-arts institution affiliated with the Presbyterian Church. Whitworth's mission is to provide its diverse student body an education of the mind and the heart, equipping its graduates to honor God, follow Christ, and serve humanity. This mission is carried out by a community of Christian scholars committed to excellent teaching and to the integration of faith and learning."

Now I understand not all DIII programs have religious affiliations, but in general these are all institutions that hold students to a slightly higher standard when it comes to academics and campus behavior in general. I also understand that many students who attend schools with religious affiliations have no such affiliation/belief themselves. However, those individuals are still held to the same standard and are expected to comply with University rules/values just like everyone else.

Let's say a program is constantly taking individuals who do not wish to abide by these standards. They don't really go to class, they break rules, etc. and yet they continue to play and the program continues to succeed. The institution itself is compromising it's own "mission statement" or values in order to have a good basketball team.

I read Fan O SCIAC's post as asking "Is it ok for a DIII program (who touts academic prestige and moral excellence) to bring in a kid they know will be great, just for the sake of winning? Even when academic success and/or personal growth are of no concern to the kid?" Michael Taylor just happened to be a terrible example.

Competition at any level is about winning, but Division III as a whole puts a greater value on the "student" part of student-athlete than any other level in the NCAA or NAIA. If a program is compromising that emphasis with 4th year transfers who are there only because they got booted from another program and the University just wants to win, does it become "objectionable"?