2012 Division III NCAA Tournament

[David Collinge]

We McMurry fans remember the 2000 season when the South and Great Lakes were thrown together. #1 Calvin, #2 H-SC (upset by Maryville) and #4 McMurry [...]

and #3 Wooster! 

[...] were thrown into the Calvin bracket, at Calvin, in the Sweet 16.

I was at a second-round game (from a bye-home-away bracket) at Occidental a couple of years ago, and it was special.  I hope such games are not a thing of the past, with all future playoff games to be played within an area described by St. Louis, Minneapolis, Boston, Washington, and Cincinnati.

[Ralph Turner]

Oh, that is right, David!

I was a newbie to D3Hoops.com that winter.

I was still learning the difference between this and Columbus Multimedia.

The 59-game format gives the out-lying areas a chance to host a single game.

As it stands now, Mississippi College is an NCAA-plane-flight for everyone in the ASC-West, and MissColl is barely a bus ride to Maryville TN.  The ASC pre-season poll came out.  On the 20 ballots that were cast in the ASC-West, 4 teams got 1st place votes and there are 8 points separating 1st from 4th.  Very, very close!

Also David, Russell Vanlandingham was Coach Ron Holmes' assistant on that 2000 McMurry team.  Coach Vanlandingham has rejoined Coach Holmes as an assistant.  That should be interesting to follow.  We McMurry fans are excited!

[Coach C]

Ralph -

I will admit that this does give the geographically isolated (out in the frigging sticks or on the bloody wrong coast) schools a chance at a home game, I think that for the majority of the teams it will present a chilling effect to fan involvement.  With the mini-tournaments, that overwhelming majority of temas will be on the road for their entire stay in the tournament, meaning fans will ave to drive to a game, turn around and drive back, then drive to the next game, etc. 

There just arent that many fans who are willing to do that night in and night out,especially if you didnt get a home game at all to spark campus interest.

It's a bad mistake.

[Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan)]

What I wonder about is if these "mini-tournaments" might allow smaller schools to host.  While the requirements for sectional hosts till include a 1,000 capacity minimum, there are no requirements and guidelines for the first round hosts.  You might see some deserving teams with small facilities actually getting the advantage of hosting.  I know the NCAA would most likely go with the better and larger facility, but since there is very little money to be made anyway, I can hold out hope that a worthy small school could get rewarded.  What do you think?

[Coach C]

Hoops fan -

i think that it is fairly likely that the sectional requirements will be very similar to what we see for the mini-tournaments.  The NCAA is pushing for facility upgrades and this would be yet another way to encourage schools to build the new gym!

[Ralph Turner]

I agree with Coach C about the first and second round games at a Sectional.  We are cutting the #17 to #32 seeds out of a home game.  This is the group of schools where one is likely to find the occasional program that has had a great year.

IMHO, the 16 host gyms will likely be those belonging to the perennial powers, whether they are the strongest of the 4 teams in that part of the bracket or not.  That is too great an advantage!

[Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan)]

Well, that being said.  I like the language of the new handbook a little better than previous ones.  I'll be the optimist for the first year until the NCAA screws it up and proves me wrong.

[Coach C]

Hoops fan -

The NCAA has beante the optimism out of me!  I think that they have ALREADY screwed this year up!

C

[ziggy]

I know that there are more pool C bids this year but I am wondering how they will be given out.  I believe the great lakes and midwest regions to be far more difficult than some other regions so will schools from those regions be more likely to receive these at large bids or will they be evenly divided among regions, regardless of who the best teams are?

[sac]

......regardless of who the best teams are?

Yes

[titanhammer]

......regardless of who the best teams are?

Yes

...or will it go by the QOW index?

[Mr. Ypsi]

I know that there are more pool C bids this year but I am wondering how they will be given out.  I believe the great lakes and midwest regions to be far more difficult than some other regions so will schools from those regions be more likely to receive these at large bids or will they be evenly divided among regions, regardless of who the best teams are?

Schools from tougher regions are LESS likely to receive bids than comparable teams from less tough regions.  QOWI is done only on in-region games (as is a team's relevant W-L record).  Thus, in a weak region a good team can feast on some mediocre teams who none-the-less have good records because they in turn feasted on downright bad teams.  A merely good team in a powerful region is as likely to be prey as hunter, and the mediocre teams they beat are likely to have poor records.  Thus, a team like say Calvin or Elmhurst would be a virtual lock for a pool C in they were located in the East, but stand little chance in the Great Lakes or Midwest.

It's crazy, but them are the rules.  At least they no longer have the regional quotas of the 64-team d3 tourney - then it was 8 teams per region regardless of quality!  Some TRULY undeserving teams got in with that scenario, some almost as undeserving as pool B Dallas a couple years ago!

[A tourney-savvy coach will go for a non-conference schedule heavily laden with the top teams from really weak conferences - their opponents will have a great W-L record, but they will still beat them - 14 or 15 points for your QOWI!  This, plus NOT playing a double round-robin like REAL conferences do (thus not beating up each other) is why the NESCAC gets way more than their share of pool C bids.]

[Gregory Sager]

Good post, Chuck. You said it all in a nutshell, especially in your first paragraph about how the teams in the tougher regions suffer in the QOWI category.

[David Collinge]

I know that there are more pool C bids this year but I am wondering how they will be given out.  I believe the great lakes and midwest regions to be far more difficult than some other regions so will schools from those regions be more likely to receive these at large bids or will they be evenly divided among regions, regardless of who the best teams are?

Here's my response:
Imagine if you will a round table with eight chairs, one for each region.  All the Pool A and B selections have been made, and all the remaining teams are told to line up behind their region's chair, in order of the regional rankings.  The highest-ranked (that's regional rankings, mind you, using the NCAA's criteria, discussed elsewhere; not the d3hoops.com rankings) team in each region takes their region's seat at the table.  From those eight teams, one is selected, and gets up to go to the Pool C Lounge for a beer.  The team that was standing behind that chair moves up and takes a seat at the table, and the process repeats.  And repeats, and keeps repeating, until the Pool C Lounge reaches its capacity.  (Then several of the teams from the eastern side of the table grumble about not being invited to the Pool C Lounge, and decide to go to the ECAC Tavern, thinking that they'll still be able to have a good time, but they're always wrong.)

So it's theoretically possible that all 18 Pool C bids could come from one region, but when teams are actually being selected, there's never more (or less) than one team from each region being discussed.

See also http://www.d3hoops.com/faq.php?question=33, keeping in mind that the numbers (48 men, 50 women) are last year's numbers.

[Gregory Sager]

David, that post has really made me thirsty.