MBB: American Rivers Conference

[Klopenhiemer]

Guys.  Arn't all d3 athletes with the exception of a few works in progress or "projects" in general?  Basketball might be an exception, and I am willing to hear what people think. 

But here is my point.  Isnt the reason most kids go to d3 is not because they are in love with the level of play, but more that their level of play matches d3.  I have never heard of a kid growing up saying I want to play for BV one day.  Now there are exceptions such as coaches kids and kids in the community.  But once these kids reach the age where they understand what a d1 team is, do they strive for this?  I would assume so, my dream way to play for the Hawkeyes.  When I graduated high school I was 6' 200lb pulling guard.  Not exactally Iowa Hawkeye material!

My sport was football, but most of the kids that I came in with had talent, but were works in progress.  We neeed to add more weight, gain more strength, get faster, learn the game more from better coaching.  These all things that I was provided. 

I do see the point in a 7' 1" kid coming to BV and not playing right away.  Obviously the kid has two left feet or else he would not be roaming the hardwood for the Beavers.  I will agree with Greg on the idea of placing the "force" tag on a kids before he has even enrolled in the college.  Of course the coaches have a plan, but a lot can happen over the next two years.  He could fail out, quit, get hurt, transfer.  Way to many unknowns to throw that idea around. 

The 7 Footer i would be referring to is Gute who will be a junior next year.  He has been in the system for 2 years and caught behind some very good posts in Fogelman, Cleveland, Fredrichsen, and Arndorfer.  With 2 of those guys graduating he could see some back up minutes next year and i think do a decent job.  Obviously he was a big project but practicing with those guys everyday has to help him and i think could provide a quality minutes and year next year.  VH is a great coach and we will see how he uses him next year.  He made a great coaching move to put him on the ball in the game against Wash U to make the inbounds play difficult and it worked out for him.

I am comparing apples and oranges, and by that I mean football and basketball.  When I played football at BV, we had a few mosters who stood on the sidelines.  I saw opposing teams with mosters sanding on the sidelines.  My point, you knew when you saw a junior who was the size of White hall standing on the sidelines, you knew he did not have a whole lot of talent. 

VH is a great coach and could probably leave BV and have his pick of many coaching vacancies.  He will get the best out of Gute, but I think we can all agree that the kid is not the most talented, and will not have realistic chance to start till his senior year.  To that point he may never start and play sparingly.  But he has done one thing, he has stuck it out to date, and that shows great charecter in the kid. 

[Gregory Sager]

Guys.  Arn't all d3 athletes with the exception of a few works in progress or "projects" in general?

Not really. The quintessential D3 basketball player is a kid who is either currently maxing out his potential for his age and talent level, or is within sight of it. D3 is full of players who are fundamentally sound, mentally adept, and hard workers, but who are a step too slow, two inches too short, or twenty pounds too light (or some combination of the three) to play at the scholarship level. This is especially true of perimeter players, but it's true of a lot of big men as well.

You usually see the "project" tag applied to a big man, because if you have a 6'8 player at this level who can contribute positively in any way, shape, or form on the floor you have a decided advantage. Thing is, it's not that easy to find a 6'8 high school basketball player who fits the D3 bill of fundamental soundness, mental aptitude, and a strong work ethic who isn't already getting scholarship offers. This is especially true for an IIAC program; as strong as Loras has made itself in recent seasons, it's still a member of a middling D3 conference that thus has a certain disadvantage when it goes up against CCIW or WIAC programs for an Illinois-based prospect. If you're 6'8 and up, you can walk and chew gum at the same time, you have both the money and the grades to get into school, and you've expressed a willingness to play the game in college and to work hard at improving at it, it's a pretty good bet that an IIAC program will take you and make the commitment to try to mold you into a decent player even if you demonstrated limited ability in high school.

I'm not saying that Dan Pawelski has two left feet, a la the Buena Vista seven-footer. I've never seen Pawelski play. But my guess, based on what I've been told about him, is that his ceiling as a player is too modest for him to be unilaterally declared a future "force", sight unseen, as a Loras upperclassman. As I said, you can't even make that declaration with certitude for a genuine blue-chip.

[Klopenhiemer]

Guys.  Arn't all d3 athletes with the exception of a few works in progress or "projects" in general?

Not really. The quintessential D3 basketball player is a kid who is either currently maxing out his potential for his age and talent level, or is within sight of it. D3 is full of players who are fundamentally sound, mentally adept, and hard workers, but who are a step too slow, two inches too short, or twenty pounds too light (or some combination of the three) to play at the scholarship level. This is especially true of perimeter players, but it's true of a lot of big men as well.

You usually see the "project" tag applied to a big man, because if you have a 6'8 player at this level who can contribute positively in any way, shape, or form on the floor you have a decided advantage. Thing is, it's not that easy to find a 6'8 high school basketball player who fits the D3 bill of fundamental soundness, mental aptitude, and a strong work ethic who isn't already getting scholarship offers. This is especially true for an IIAC program; as strong as Loras has made itself in recent seasons, it's still a member of a middling D3 conference that thus has a certain disadvantage when it goes up against CCIW or WIAC programs for an Illinois-based prospect. If you're 6'8 and up, you can walk and chew gum at the same time, you have both the money and the grades to get into school, and you've expressed a willingness to play the game in college and to work hard at improving at it, it's a pretty good bet that an IIAC program will take you and make the commitment to try to mold you into a decent player even if you demonstrated limited ability in high school.

I'm not saying that Dan Pawelski has two left feet, a la the Buena Vista seven-footer. I've never seen Pawelski play. But my guess, based on what I've been told about him, is that his ceiling as a player is too modest for him to be unilaterally declared a future "force", sight unseen, as a Loras upperclassman. As I said, you can't even make that declaration with certitude for a genuine blue-chip.

Greg point taken and nice post.  That explained better some of the things that I was not privey to.  Like I have said in posts before that I was comparing basketball and football in regards to project players. 

Basketball is a sport where freshman can play right away and make great contributions. Basketball is also a sport where a person like LBJ can jump from high school to the Cavs.  No one ever sees a kid jump from quarterback of Naperville North the Chicago Bears.  It just can not happen. 

So I did paint the project kid with a broad brush across all d3 sports.  As one person said to me early in my football career, "if your playing as a freshman you are either a great talent or you team has no depth". 

Now Greg back to your posts.  With what you have said, this has to make recruiting the d3 level of basketball increasingly difficult, espically if you are in lower tier team in a lower tier conference. 

I hope to see the IIAC continue to compete on the national level.  BV play the eventual national champion very closely.  But that does not mean that the IIAC deserve national attention now.  It will take many years of continued success to achieve that status. 

[The Show]

VH is a great coach and we will see how he uses him next year.  He made a great coaching move to put him on the ball in the game against Wash U to make the inbounds play difficult and it worked out for him.

VH read my mind on that one.  We had just watched Harlan lose the 3A title game the night before on a lob pass to past halfcourt and a turnaround hail mary went in.  I instructed my wife, you need to guard the inbounds pass!  I received my "who cares?" look.  So the following night, BV's in the same spot, and VH puts Gute over the ball.  Great decision and they win the ball game. I gave my wife the "I told you so" speech...

I said it before when they were recruiting Gute, if he continues to improve like he did between his junior and senior year of high school, he will be a very good player for BV.

[The Show]

This is especially true for an IIAC program; as strong as Loras has made itself in recent seasons, it's still a member of a middling D3 conference that thus has a certain disadvantage when it goes up against CCIW or WIAC programs for an Illinois-based prospect.

Not that BV goes after many Illinois prospects, but the IIAC displayed how it could compete with the WIAC this past tourny...

[Gregory Sager]

Now Greg back to your posts.  With what you have said, this has to make recruiting the d3 level of basketball increasingly difficult, espically if you are in lower tier team in a lower tier conference. 

Yep. That's why I have enormous respect for the coaches who are the primary recruiters for their D3 programs, whether it's the head coaches themselves or their chief assistants. Getting good players at this level is an uphill battle, and that's especially true if your school isn't a member of a glamour conference or a publicity magnet.

Not that BV goes after many Illinois prospects, but the IIAC displayed how it could compete with the WIAC this past tourny...

Whoa, fella. That is one serious overstatement. Buena Vista beats UWSP in a tourney game, and all of a sudden the IIAC as a whole is competing with the WIAC as a whole? You might want to rethink that declaration.

[Klopenhiemer]

Now Greg back to your posts.  With what you have said, this has to make recruiting the d3 level of basketball increasingly difficult, espically if you are in lower tier team in a lower tier conference. 

Yep. That's why I have enormous respect for the coaches who are the primary recruiters for their D3 programs, whether it's the head coaches themselves or their chief assistants. Getting good players at this level is an uphill battle, and that's especially true if your school isn't a member of a glamour conference or a publicity magnet.

Not that BV goes after many Illinois prospects, but the IIAC displayed how it could compete with the WIAC this past tourny...

Whoa, fella. That is one serious overstatement. Buena Vista beats UWSP in a tourney game, and all of a sudden the IIAC as a whole is competing with the WIAC as a whole? You might want to rethink that declaration.

Whoa Greg!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!.  Show in no way said the IIAC as a whole is competing as a whole against the WIAC. 

The IIAC showed this year that we can compete once tourney time starts.  Lets hope the IIAC contiunes to prove this for years to come.  Sending two teams to the big dance next year and going 0-2 and BBQ will prove nothing. 

Maybe I should add in some coachspeak

[SLP-O-8]

Loras beat Wisconsin Whitewater as well but that doesnt prove IIAC is better than WIAC but they did perform last year very well in the tournament

[Mr. Ypsi]

Loras beat Wisconsin Whitewater as well but that doesnt prove IIAC is better than WIAC but they did perform last year very well in the tournament

That occurred to me right away - I kept wondering how long until an IIAC poster would mention it!

This is not exactly a beehive of activity in the off-season.  And belated congratulations on a fine postseason!   Almost certainy the WIAC is still overall superior to the IIAC in bball, but you don't need to take any sh!t from them THIS year!

[Gregory Sager]

Now Greg back to your posts.  With what you have said, this has to make recruiting the d3 level of basketball increasingly difficult, espically if you are in lower tier team in a lower tier conference. 

Yep. That's why I have enormous respect for the coaches who are the primary recruiters for their D3 programs, whether it's the head coaches themselves or their chief assistants. Getting good players at this level is an uphill battle, and that's especially true if your school isn't a member of a glamour conference or a publicity magnet.

Not that BV goes after many Illinois prospects, but the IIAC displayed how it could compete with the WIAC this past tourny...

Whoa, fella. That is one serious overstatement. Buena Vista beats UWSP in a tourney game, and all of a sudden the IIAC as a whole is competing with the WIAC as a whole? You might want to rethink that declaration.

Whoa Greg!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!.  Show in no way said the IIAC as a whole is competing as a whole against the WIAC.

Actually, that's exactly what he said. Look at his quote again: "the IIAC displayed how it could compete with the WIAC this past tourney." There was no mention of the two specific teams involved (Buena Vista and UWSP). Instead, he cited each conference as a whole. Plus, he did not confine the context of his remark to the 2008 tourney; in fact, he inserted the comment into a discussion (current recruiting within the state of Illinois involving IIAC, CCIW, and WIAC programs) that had nothing to do with the 2008 tourney.

The IIAC showed this year that we can compete once tourney time starts.

... and now you're doing the same thing as Show! You're substituting the IIAC as a whole for Buena Vista, and the WIAC as a whole for UWSP. Plus, you're asserting that this ability of the IIAC to compete with the WIAC is an ongoing condition, rather than a one-off as demonstrated by Buena Vista's win over UWSP. That has not yet been proven. Yes, the IIAC did go 3-1 against the WIAC this past season -- but that has to be qualified by the fact that four games is a small sample size. Plus, two of those three wins were by the IIAC's two best teams, Buena Vista and Loras. The more indicative sample size is how the two leagues have fared against each other over the past seven seasons (which is as far back as the IIAC records go). Since 2001-02, the WIAC has a pretty commanding 34-16 advantage over the IIAC in head-to-head contests, and last season was the only season out of those seven in which the IIAC won more games against the big boys on the other side of the river than they lost.

I understand yours and Show's desire to extend the success of Buena Vista and Loras to the rest of the league vis-a-vis the WIAC, but it doesn't work that way. You don't measure a league's strength by its topmost elite; you measure it by the entire league from top to bottom. Are Buena Vista and Loras competitive with the WIAC (and, by extension, just about everyone else in D3)? Based upon the past couple of seasons, the answer appears to be yes. Is the IIAC competitive with the WIAC -- which, again, given the WIAC's prowess would mean that the IIAC is competitive with the CCIW, the UAA, the NESCAC, and pretty much every other league in the division? The answer is no.

Look, Hope reached the Final Four last season, but not even the most ardent MIAA supporter would tell you that the MIAA is anything but a middle-tier conference at this point. It has very good programs at the top, but Hope, Calvin, and Albion are balanced out by some very bad programs at the bottom of the league. In 2007 Wooster advanced to the Final Four, and the year before that Wittenberg made it to Salem -- and yet in neither year would you see an NCAC fan tout that league as one of the best in D3. Again, the top of the league could play with anybody, but the bottom was so dreadful that it evened out the Wooster and Wittenberg teams and left the NCAC at a level of mediocrity.

If you want to assert that the IIAC is competitive with the WIAC -- and, again, keep in mind that the WIAC is the league by which everyone else in D3 has been measured over the past two decades -- then you have to prove it while considering all nine IIAC teams, not just the top one or two. And if you want to assert that IIAC teams are as good as the WIAC's when March rolls around, you're gonna have to prove it by having an IIAC representative actually reach the Final Four. No IIAC team has ever made it to the season's final weekend. The WIAC, by contrast, has made eleven trips to the Final Four and has come away with eight national championships -- and they've achieved that in significantly less time within the D3 ranks than the IIAC has had.

SLP-O-8 has the right perspective; the Loras win over UWW and the Buena Vista win over UWSP don't justify any grand statements made on behalf of the IIAC against the WIAC. What they mean is that the IIAC has a couple of very solid Top 25 level programs at the moment. That's enough of an achievement to enjoy if you're a Duhawks fan or a Beavers fan without overreaching by saying that the IIAC is on the same competitive level as the WIAC, either in March or throughout the entire season.

[keith45]

Now Greg back to your posts.  With what you have said, this has to make recruiting the d3 level of basketball increasingly difficult, espically if you are in lower tier team in a lower tier conference. 

Yep. That's why I have enormous respect for the coaches who are the primary recruiters for their D3 programs, whether it's the head coaches themselves or their chief assistants. Getting good players at this level is an uphill battle, and that's especially true if your school isn't a member of a glamour conference or a publicity magnet.

Not that BV goes after many Illinois prospects, but the IIAC displayed how it could compete with the WIAC this past tourny...

Whoa, fella. That is one serious overstatement. Buena Vista beats UWSP in a tourney game, and all of a sudden the IIAC as a whole is competing with the WIAC as a whole? You might want to rethink that declaration.

Whoa Greg!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!.  Show in no way said the IIAC as a whole is competing as a whole against the WIAC.

Actually, that's exactly what he said. Look at his quote again: "the IIAC displayed how it could compete with the WIAC this past tourney." There was no mention of the two specific teams involved (Buena Vista and UWSP). Instead, he cited each conference as a whole. Plus, he did not confine the context of his remark to the 2008 tourney; in fact, he inserted the comment into a discussion (current recruiting within the state of Illinois involving IIAC, CCIW, and WIAC programs) that had nothing to do with the 2008 tourney.

The IIAC showed this year that we can compete once tourney time starts.

... and now you're doing the same thing as Show! You're substituting the IIAC as a whole for Buena Vista, and the WIAC as a whole for UWSP. Plus, you're asserting that this ability of the IIAC to compete with the WIAC is an ongoing condition, rather than a one-off as demonstrated by Buena Vista's win over UWSP. That has not yet been proven. Yes, the IIAC did go 3-1 against the WIAC this past season -- but that has to be qualified by the fact that four games is a small sample size. Plus, two of those three wins were by the IIAC's two best teams, Buena Vista and Loras. The more indicative sample size is how the two leagues have fared against each other over the past seven seasons (which is as far back as the IIAC records go). Since 2001-02, the WIAC has a pretty commanding 34-16 advantage over the IIAC in head-to-head contests, and last season was the only season out of those seven in which the IIAC won more games against the big boys on the other side of the river than they lost.

I understand yours and Show's desire to extend the success of Buena Vista and Loras to the rest of the league vis-a-vis the WIAC, but it doesn't work that way. You don't measure a league's strength by its topmost elite; you measure it by the entire league from top to bottom. Are Buena Vista and Loras competitive with the WIAC (and, by extension, just about everyone else in D3)? Based upon the past couple of seasons, the answer appears to be yes. Is the IIAC competitive with the WIAC -- which, again, given the WIAC's prowess would mean that the IIAC is competitive with the CCIW, the UAA, the NESCAC, and pretty much every other league in the division? The answer is no.

Look, Hope reached the Final Four last season, but not even the most ardent MIAA supporter would tell you that the MIAA is anything but a middle-tier conference at this point. It has very good programs at the top, but Hope, Calvin, and Albion are balanced out by some very bad programs at the bottom of the league. In 2007 Wooster advanced to the Final Four, and the year before that Wittenberg made it to Salem -- and yet in neither year would you see an NCAC fan tout that league as one of the best in D3. Again, the top of the league could play with anybody, but the bottom was so dreadful that it evened out the Wooster and Wittenberg teams and left the NCAC at a level of mediocrity.

If you want to assert that the IIAC is competitive with the WIAC -- and, again, keep in mind that the WIAC is the league by which everyone else in D3 has been measured over the past two decades -- then you have to prove it while considering all nine IIAC teams, not just the top one or two. And if you want to assert that IIAC teams are as good as the WIAC's when March rolls around, you're gonna have to prove it by having an IIAC representative actually reach the Final Four. No IIAC team has ever made it to the season's final weekend. The WIAC, by contrast, has made eleven trips to the Final Four and has come away with eight national championships -- and they've achieved that in significantly less time within the D3 ranks than the IIAC has had.

SLP-O-8 has the right perspective; the Loras win over UWW and the Buena Vista win over UWSP don't justify any grand statements made on behalf of the IIAC against the WIAC. What they mean is that the IIAC has a couple of very solid Top 25 level programs at the moment. That's enough of an achievement to enjoy if you're a Duhawks fan or a Beavers fan without overreaching by saying that the IIAC is on the same competitive level as the WIAC, either in March or throughout the entire season.

Can we at least say that the IIAC is closing the gap a bit over the last 2-3 years? UD beat a ranked Platteville team 2 years ago, Loras and BV had success this year..feels like the wins are against the top half of the WIAC?

[Klopenhiemer]

Now Greg back to your posts.  With what you have said, this has to make recruiting the d3 level of basketball increasingly difficult, espically if you are in lower tier team in a lower tier conference. 

Yep. That's why I have enormous respect for the coaches who are the primary recruiters for their D3 programs, whether it's the head coaches themselves or their chief assistants. Getting good players at this level is an uphill battle, and that's especially true if your school isn't a member of a glamour conference or a publicity magnet.

Not that BV goes after many Illinois prospects, but the IIAC displayed how it could compete with the WIAC this past tourny...

Whoa, fella. That is one serious overstatement. Buena Vista beats UWSP in a tourney game, and all of a sudden the IIAC as a whole is competing with the WIAC as a whole? You might want to rethink that declaration.

Whoa Greg!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!.  Show in no way said the IIAC as a whole is competing as a whole against the WIAC.

Actually, that's exactly what he said. Look at his quote again: "the IIAC displayed how it could compete with the WIAC this past tourney." There was no mention of the two specific teams involved (Buena Vista and UWSP). Instead, he cited each conference as a whole. Plus, he did not confine the context of his remark to the 2008 tourney; in fact, he inserted the comment into a discussion (current recruiting within the state of Illinois involving IIAC, CCIW, and WIAC programs) that had nothing to do with the 2008 tourney.

The IIAC showed this year that we can compete once tourney time starts.

... and now you're doing the same thing as Show! You're substituting the IIAC as a whole for Buena Vista, and the WIAC as a whole for UWSP. Plus, you're asserting that this ability of the IIAC to compete with the WIAC is an ongoing condition, rather than a one-off as demonstrated by Buena Vista's win over UWSP. That has not yet been proven. Yes, the IIAC did go 3-1 against the WIAC this past season -- but that has to be qualified by the fact that four games is a small sample size. Plus, two of those three wins were by the IIAC's two best teams, Buena Vista and Loras. The more indicative sample size is how the two leagues have fared against each other over the past seven seasons (which is as far back as the IIAC records go). Since 2001-02, the WIAC has a pretty commanding 34-16 advantage over the IIAC in head-to-head contests, and last season was the only season out of those seven in which the IIAC won more games against the big boys on the other side of the river than they lost.

I understand yours and Show's desire to extend the success of Buena Vista and Loras to the rest of the league vis-a-vis the WIAC, but it doesn't work that way. You don't measure a league's strength by its topmost elite; you measure it by the entire league from top to bottom. Are Buena Vista and Loras competitive with the WIAC (and, by extension, just about everyone else in D3)? Based upon the past couple of seasons, the answer appears to be yes. Is the IIAC competitive with the WIAC -- which, again, given the WIAC's prowess would mean that the IIAC is competitive with the CCIW, the UAA, the NESCAC, and pretty much every other league in the division? The answer is no.

Look, Hope reached the Final Four last season, but not even the most ardent MIAA supporter would tell you that the MIAA is anything but a middle-tier conference at this point. It has very good programs at the top, but Hope, Calvin, and Albion are balanced out by some very bad programs at the bottom of the league. In 2007 Wooster advanced to the Final Four, and the year before that Wittenberg made it to Salem -- and yet in neither year would you see an NCAC fan tout that league as one of the best in D3. Again, the top of the league could play with anybody, but the bottom was so dreadful that it evened out the Wooster and Wittenberg teams and left the NCAC at a level of mediocrity.

If you want to assert that the IIAC is competitive with the WIAC -- and, again, keep in mind that the WIAC is the league by which everyone else in D3 has been measured over the past two decades -- then you have to prove it while considering all nine IIAC teams, not just the top one or two. And if you want to assert that IIAC teams are as good as the WIAC's when March rolls around, you're gonna have to prove it by having an IIAC representative actually reach the Final Four. No IIAC team has ever made it to the season's final weekend. The WIAC, by contrast, has made eleven trips to the Final Four and has come away with eight national championships -- and they've achieved that in significantly less time within the D3 ranks than the IIAC has had.

SLP-O-8 has the right perspective; the Loras win over UWW and the Buena Vista win over UWSP don't justify any grand statements made on behalf of the IIAC against the WIAC. What they mean is that the IIAC has a couple of very solid Top 25 level programs at the moment. That's enough of an achievement to enjoy if you're a Duhawks fan or a Beavers fan without overreaching by saying that the IIAC is on the same competitive level as the WIAC, either in March or throughout the entire season.

Greg two questions before I begin.    

1.)  Have you even been wrong?
2.)  Are you a lawyer?

Okay those were just for fun and a little friendly ribbing

I find the WIAC and IIAC comparision to be apples to oranges considering many other factors.  If you want to break this down to the level that you have, lets start comparing some apples to apples.  

Compare WIAC size of school to IIAC size of school:  Advantage WIAC

Compare tution costs between the WIAC and IIAC:  Advantage WIAC

Compare the red shirting policy between the WIAC and IIAC:  Advantage WIAC
(I know this rule has changed)

When you start to compare some of the tangible items, it is clear why the WIAC should dominate the IIAC.  Going 31-16 over the past 7 years is not half bad if you really want to think about it.  Compare the Big Ten to the ACC.  The ACC dominates the win/loss record but take a look at the programs there compared to the Big Ten.  

You make comparisions between the IIAC and the CCIW.  The CCIW should be much better than the IIAC.  Look at the population the CCIW servers compared to the IIAC.  Look at the cities that these schools are located in compared to the IIAC.  

Wheaton is thriving community as you well know nesseled in between two rather well known cities:  Aurora and Naperville.  Buena Vista is in a packing plant town that is surrounded by a lack luster lake and corn fields.  

My only point is that on paper the WIAC and CCIW should blow the doors off the IIAC year in and year out.  But you have some teams making a small amount of noise coming from a state who has less population as a whole than the city of Chicago proper.  

[Gregory Sager]

Can we at least say that the IIAC is closing the gap a bit over the last 2-3 years? UD beat a ranked Platteville team 2 years ago, Loras and BV had success this year..feels like the wins are against the top half of the WIAC?

I think that that's a fair assessment, Keith.

I find the WIAC and IIAC comparision to be apples to oranges considering many other factors.  If you want to break this down to the level that you have, lets start comparing some apples to apples.  

Compare WIAC size of school to IIAC size of school:  Advantage WIAC

Compare tution costs between the WIAC and IIAC:  Advantage WIAC

Compare the red shirting policy between the WIAC and IIAC:  Advantage WIAC
(I know this rule has changed)

When you start to compare some of the tangible items, it is clear why the WIAC should dominate the IIAC.  Going 31-16 over the past 7 years is not half bad if you really want to think about it.  Compare the Big Ten to the ACC.  The ACC dominates the win/loss record but take a look at the programs there compared to the Big Ten.  

You make comparisions between the IIAC and the CCIW.  The CCIW should be much better than the IIAC.  Look at the population the CCIW servers compared to the IIAC.  Look at the cities that these schools are located in compared to the IIAC.  

Wheaton is thriving community as you well know nesseled in between two rather well known cities:  Aurora and Naperville.  Buena Vista is in a packing plant town that is surrounded by a lack luster lake and corn fields.  

My only point is that on paper the WIAC and CCIW should blow the doors off the IIAC year in and year out.  But you have some teams making a small amount of noise coming from a state who has less population as a whole than the city of Chicago proper.

That's a nice try to shift the playing field for the discussion, Klop, but it's not gonna work.  None of this stuff is relevant to the issue at hand, which is the (incorrect, IMHO) assertion that the IIAC is competitive with the WIAC based upon Buena Vista's win over UWSP two months ago. I'll take this as a sign that you've conceded that point, and move on.

As for what you've said about the IIAC's disadvantages, well ... seems to me that you're stating the obvious here. Although school size, a redshirting policy made illegal three years ago, and the relative winsomeness of Wheaton, IL as compared to Storm Lake, IA aren't nearly as relevant to the success of a basketball team (or lack thereof) as are a lot of other factors, I think everyone agrees that the IIAC has some built-in disadvantages to overcome. On the other hand, it has some advantages as well: A location in a state renowned as a high school basketball hotbed (as compared to the MIAC, f'rinstance, which is located in a hockey-mad state in which a lot of young athletes opt to play that other winter sport); schools that have long and solid reputations both as educational institutions and as basketball programs; a relative dearth of small-school competition for recruiting (there's only the Midwest Collegiate Conference, and the Great Plains Athletic Conference in the far northwestern corner of the state); etc.

Every league has its pluses and minuses in terms of the environment within which it operates. You make do with what you have. It seems to me that Buena Vista has succeeded in making do with what it has (and I would imagine that its #1 resource, or close to it, in terms of fielding a successful men's basketball team is the presence of Brian Van Haaften), and Loras is getting there as well in terms of maximizing advantages (Loras, for example, is making the most of its geographical location by recruiting lots of Chicagolanders). It's up to the rest of the IIAC's programs to avoid moaning about their disadvantages and wallowing in self-pity over them, and to find their advantages and utilize them.

Why? Because, as much as you claim that it's apples against oranges, the fact of the matter is that it's an all-fruit division, not just a division for apples. Division III doesn't hold a special tournament in March for conferences from underpopulated states. You're asked to play teams from the UAA, the CCIW, the WIAC, the MIAC, etc., and that's the situation with which you have to deal. And at the end of the day, nobody's going to care if you say, "Well, we only win 32% of our games against the WIAC, but their schools are cheaper to attend and have better gyms than ours," or, "Well, we've never made it to the Final Four, but we have all this stuff working against us so no one should ever expect us to make it to the Final Four." All that people ultimately care about is the bottom line. To use the famous paraphrase of Al Davis, "Just win, baby."

[AndOne]

I find the WIAC and IIAC comparision to be apples to oranges considering many other factors.  If you want to break this down to the level that you have, lets start comparing some apples to apples. 

Compare WIAC size of school to IIAC size of school:  Advantage WIAC

Compare tution costs between the WIAC and IIAC:  Advantage WIAC

Compare the red shirting policy between the WIAC and IIAC:  Advantage WIAC
(I know this rule has changed)

When you start to compare some of the tangible items, it is clear why the WIAC should dominate the IIAC.  Going 31-16 over the past 7 years is not half bad if you really want to think about it.  Compare the Big Ten to the ACC.  The ACC dominates the win/loss record but take a look at the programs there compared to the Big Ten. 

You make comparisions between the IIAC and the CCIW.  The CCIW should be much better than the IIAC.  Look at the population the CCIW servers compared to the IIAC.  Look at the cities that these schools are located in compared to the IIAC. 

Wheaton is thriving community as you well know nesseled in between two rather well known cities:  Aurora and Naperville.  Buena Vista is in a packing plant town that is surrounded by a lack luster lake and corn fields. 

My only point is that on paper the WIAC and CCIW should blow the doors off the IIAC year in and year out.  But you have some teams making a small amount of noise coming from a state who has less population as a whole than the city of Chicago proper.

That's a nice try to shift the playing field for the discussion, Klop, but it's not gonna work.  None of this stuff is relevant to the issue at hand, which is the (incorrect, IMHO) assertion that the IIAC is competitive with the WIAC based upon Buena Vista's win over UWSP two months ago. I'll take this as a sign that you've conceded that point, and move on.

As for what you've said about the IIAC's disadvantages, well ... seems to me that you're stating the obvious here. Although school size, a redshirting policy made illegal three years ago, and the relative winsomeness of Wheaton, IL as compared to Storm Lake, IA aren't nearly as relevant to the success of a basketball team (or lack thereof) as are a lot of other factors, I think everyone agrees that the IIAC has some built-in disadvantages to overcome. On the other hand, it has some advantages as well: A location in a state renowned as a high school basketball hotbed (as compared to the MIAC, f'rinstance, which is located in a hockey-mad state in which a lot of young athletes opt to play that other winter sport); schools that have long and solid reputations both as educational institutions and as basketball programs; a relative dearth of small-school competition for recruiting (there's only the Midwest Collegiate Conference, and the Great Plains Athletic Conference in the far northwestern corner of the state); etc.

Every league has its pluses and minuses in terms of the environment within which it operates. You make do with what you have. It seems to me that Buena Vista has succeeded in making do with what it has (and I would imagine that its #1 resource, or close to it, in terms of fielding a successful men's basketball team is the presence of Brian Van Haaften), and Loras is getting there as well in terms of maximizing advantages (Loras, for example, is making the most of its geographical location by recruiting lots of Chicagolanders). It's up to the rest of the IIAC's programs to avoid moaning about their disadvantages and wallowing in self-pity over them, and to find their advantages and utilize them.

Why? Because, as much as you claim that it's apples against oranges, the fact of the matter is that it's an all-fruit division, not just a division for apples. Division III doesn't hold a special tournament in March for conferences from underpopulated states. You're asked to play teams from the UAA, the CCIW, the WIAC, the MIAC, etc., and that's the situation with which you have to deal. And at the end of the day, nobody's going to care if you say, "Well, we only win 32% of our games against the WIAC, but their schools are cheaper to attend and have better gyms than ours," or, "Well, we've never made it to the Final Four, but we have all this stuff working against us so no one should ever expect us to make it to the Final Four." All that people ultimately care about is the bottom line. To use the famous paraphrase of Al Davis, "Just win, baby."

Greg-----

I sense that you'll find a multitude of coaches and players at a significant number of member institutions who might vociferously object to being referred to or associated with being any member of the "fruit" family!!!!
                 

[AndOne]

Wheaton is thriving community as you well know nesseled in between two rather well known cities:  Aurora and Naperville.  Buena Vista is in a packing plant town that is surrounded by a lack luster lake and corn fields. 

Klop----

I think you'll find that the primary reasons most student-athletes who choose Wheaton College do so are because of the combination of the excellent education available there combined with the school's religious philosophy. NOT because its nestled between the well known cities of Naperville and Aurora. In fact, Aurora, which has several beautiful subdivisions, ranks high in gang activity, drug use, and murder rate. Not exactly things Wheaton students are usually associated with.