WBB: Minnesota Intercollegiate Athletic Conference

[buf]

Wow...Minnesota Morris gets in and GAC and St. Ben's stay home. Bummer.

I had a feeling this may happen.  A few years ago the WIAC men were in a similar situation.  D3hoops projected both in, I believe, but the NCAA kept both out because one didn't stand out over the other when applying the criteria.

[LA RAMS]

Wow...Minnesota Morris gets in and GAC and St. Ben's stay home. Bummer.

"WOW" would likely be the understatement of this relatively young new year.  I'm curious how the brain (dead) wizards at the NCAA justified allowing FIVE NESCAC teams into the tourney; even more so Minnesota-Morris.   FREAKING Minnesota-Morris at 19-7; ARE YOU KIDDING ME??!!  Let's see here, hmmm...UM-M got beat by Presentation by double-digits in their own crib no less.  Presentation then goes to Northwestern and gets unceremoniously dumped in the UMAC Championship Game by host Northwestern (which, BTW, was beaten at home by Bethel on New Year's Eve which just also happened to get swept by both GAC, CSB, AND UST).  I don't know.  I really don't have so much of a problem with GAC not getting in by its own merit BUT to choose UM-M over GAC, CSB, and even Coe is simply laughable. 

All I can say is that whatever the NCAA people were smokin' must have been pretty good stuff.  Maybe they can share it with the rest of us. 

[buf]

At 20-8, Southern Maine gets in over GAC and St Bens.

Also, 5 NESCAC teams.


I think that the MIAC should really start looking at dropping some conference games (playing only some teams once), thus getting the opportunity for the top teams to schedule good non-conference teams to improve their SOS.  The way the MIAC does it now, the possible teams considered for pool C selection will always have a SOS around .50 or slightly better.

With less conference games, there may be some "unfairness" within the conference, but it may help come national tourney time.

[buf]

Wow...Minnesota Morris gets in and GAC and St. Ben's stay home. Bummer.

"WOW" would likely be the understatement of this relatively young new year.  I'm curious how the brain (dead) wizards at the NCAA justified allowing FIVE NESCAC teams into the tourney; even more so Minnesota-Morris.   FREAKING Minnesota-Morris at 19-7; ARE YOU KIDDING ME??!!  Let's see here, hmmm...UM-M got beat by Presentation by double-digits in their own crib no less.  Presentation then goes to Northwestern and gets unceremoniously dumped in the UMAC Championship Game by host Northwestern (which, BTW, was beaten at home by Bethel on New Year's Eve which just also happened to get swept by both GAC, CSB, AND UST).  I don't know.  I really don't have so much of a problem with GAC not getting in by its own merit BUT to choose UM-M over GAC, CSB, and even Coe is simply laughable. 

All I can say is that whatever the NCAA people were smokin' must have been pretty good stuff.  Maybe they can share it with the rest of us. 

Minnesota Morris is a Pool B team.

[blazerguy]

Actually, a revised projection now has CSB left off...and GAC in the field.  Interesting...but not surprising given the NCAA's natural proclivity to deny CSB at-large berths  Remember - they got left out at 22-3 so this would not be a shocker.  I can understand the NCAA leaving both out but if the NCAA puts GAC in and CSB out...wow wow wow.  Please note...I am not arguing that CSB should be selected OVER GAC...they both have arguments and there is no way the committee can honestly choose one over the other...but they will...and it will be GAC.  Bank on it.  The stats are not in favor of either - it's basically a wash.  There is one intangible...   

Winning percentage - slight edge to GAC:
CSB 21-6 (.78) - all games against D3 schools...
GAC 20-5 (.80) - one loss was to D2...

Strength of Schedule - slight edge to CSB:
CSB - .508 - rank #189
GAC - .502 - rank #211

Opponents Winning Percentage - slight edge to CSB:
CSB - .507
GAC - .499

Opponents Opponents Winning Percentage - slight edge to CSB:
CSB - .511
GAC - .508

GAC was 2-1 against UST and CSB was 1-2.  GAC lost to Hamline who was sub-.500 this year.  GAC lost in th semis of the conference tourney and CSB lost in the title game.  But, that extra win vs. UST could give them a slight edge. Then again, CSB has 21 Division 3 wins so it is too close to call...

SO - these two look fairly even and I just do not know how the NCAA could possibly justify picking one over the other.  They will and GAC will get the nod. ..trust me...it will happen.  CSB fans will have every right to complain.  And, to be perfecrtly fair, if CSB is chosen over GAC then GAC fans would have an argument based on what I have seen.  If GAC is denied and CSB gets a bid I will be the first to say they should have BOTH either been given bids or denied bids.  The committiee will, most definitely, keep CSB out...count on it.

The only factor I can see decidely in the GAC's favor would be having their coach on the region committee and the region committee rankings are a secondary criteria.  Understandably, GAC's coach would rank GAC ahead of CSB. Can't blame her as I would do the same.  It's just unfortunate that it could possibly come down to that selection criteria because then it is not the objective process the NCAA prides itself on...

Before I get ripped too much...I hope BOTH CSB and GAC squeek into the tourney.  But, I am not optimistic for my Blazers.  Wish we could have taken care of those darn Tommies and their scholarship athletes...oops...student-athletes!!

This all coming from the guy whose favorite word this year has been "WHINER"

My God could you possibly be more of a passive aggressive, whining, whack-job conspiracy theorist?

I'm sure the Blazers will also get screwed on the conference awards and of course coach of the year. Then Obama will blame St. Ben's for the recession and the CEO of Toyota will find some way to blame Durbin for his company's problems.

I just heard CNN report that when Blazerball jumped up and down in a tantrum after seeing that d3hoops.com projected that Gustavus was in and St. Ben's was out that it caused an aftershock in Chile.

Stay tuned for more news regarding the world is against St. Ben's...

Please don't confuse Blazerball with Blazerguy. Blazerball is the therorist, I only speak the truth.

[carletonsid]

At 20-8, Southern Maine gets in over GAC and St Bens.

Also, 5 NESCAC teams.


I think that the MIAC should really start looking at dropping some conference games (playing only some teams once), thus getting the opportunity for the top teams to schedule good non-conference teams to improve their SOS.  The way the MIAC does it now, the possible teams considered for pool C selection will always have a SOS around .50 or slightly better.

With less conference games, there may be some "unfairness" within the conference, but it may help come national tourney time.

First off, really too bad a pair of quality teams in GAC and CSB were left out. But, I think there are games on both teams' schedules they could look at and realize those losses cost them a spot in the big dance. As you corrrectly point out, without a lot of chances to impress out of conference, you can't have those trip-ups in conference play.

It might be true that more out-of-conference games will help the SoS, but where do you go? If you're GAC, CSB or UST, you'll end up playing WIAC teams. Just go ask SJU football how hard it is to find non-conference games against quality opponents. I believe SJU is relegated to playing Northwestern (MN) next year because they couldn't find anyone else to play. Plus, you can't just go play those games, you have to win some of them.

The other factor is cost--certainly cheaper to play double round-robin within the state rather than bus to Wisconsin or Iowa 3-4 more times a year. I guess it just depends on where the conference's priorities are in this moment. Of course, didn't two MIAC teams go last year and three the year before? So it's kind of hard to fault the system. It may not work to our advantage every year, but I guess I don't see 10 other institutions voting to split the conference into a pair of divisions so that two schools who feel like they got jobbed on the NCAA selection process can go play more non-conference games, if that's even what CSB and/or GAC wants.

[Pat Coleman]

We had coach Mickey Haller on Hoopsville last night and we asked her specifically about splitting into divisions. She did not advocate that but suggested perhaps the conference could do what others have done and shorten the conference schedule by a couple of games in order to let schools schedule five games out of conference.

In other leagues this is done via some sort of power rating to make sure all the top teams in the conference play each other twice whenever possible. And you'd always play your top rival school twice, etc.

A full double round-robin with 12 schools is rather unwieldy in a 25-game schedule, you must admit.

[buf]

At 20-8, Southern Maine gets in over GAC and St Bens.

Also, 5 NESCAC teams.


I think that the MIAC should really start looking at dropping some conference games (playing only some teams once), thus getting the opportunity for the top teams to schedule good non-conference teams to improve their SOS.  The way the MIAC does it now, the possible teams considered for pool C selection will always have a SOS around .50 or slightly better.

With less conference games, there may be some "unfairness" within the conference, but it may help come national tourney time.

First off, really too bad a pair of quality teams in GAC and CSB were left out. But, I think there are games on both teams' schedules they could look at and realize those losses cost them a spot in the big dance. As you corrrectly point out, without a lot of chances to impress out of conference, you can't have those trip-ups in conference play.

It might be true that more out-of-conference games will help the SoS, but where do you go? If you're GAC, CSB or UST, you'll end up playing WIAC teams. Just go ask SJU football how hard it is to find non-conference games against quality opponents. I believe SJU is relegated to playing Northwestern (MN) next year because they couldn't find anyone else to play. Plus, you can't just go play those games, you have to win some of them.

The other factor is cost--certainly cheaper to play double round-robin within the state rather than bus to Wisconsin or Iowa 3-4 more times a year. I guess it just depends on where the conference's priorities are in this moment. Of course, didn't two MIAC teams go last year and three the year before? So it's kind of hard to fault the system. It may not work to our advantage every year, but I guess I don't see 10 other institutions voting to split the conference into a pair of divisions so that two schools who feel like they got jobbed on the NCAA selection process can go play more non-conference games, if that's even what CSB and/or GAC wants.

It is definetly a tough decision.  But as long as they play only 3 non-conference games, teams just won't have an opportunity for a higher SOS

[buf]

In other leagues this is done via some sort of power rating to make sure all the top teams in the conference play each other twice whenever possible. And you'd always play your top rival school twice, etc.

A full double round-robin with 12 schools is rather unwieldy in a 25-game schedule, you must admit.

Never heard of that power rating before, but it seems pretty sweet.

[buf]

Carletonsid-

Are you sending a crew to videocast the Carleton/Point mens game? 

I think you sent a crew to Simpson a couple years ago for a women's game versus UWEC.

[SUMMIT!!!!!]

Actually, a revised projection now has CSB left off...and GAC in the field.  Interesting...but not surprising given the NCAA's natural proclivity to deny CSB at-large berths  Remember - they got left out at 22-3 so this would not be a shocker.  I can understand the NCAA leaving both out but if the NCAA puts GAC in and CSB out...wow wow wow.  Please note...I am not arguing that CSB should be selected OVER GAC...they both have arguments and there is no way the committee can honestly choose one over the other...but they will...and it will be GAC.  Bank on it.  The stats are not in favor of either - it's basically a wash.  There is one intangible...   

Winning percentage - slight edge to GAC:
CSB 21-6 (.78) - all games against D3 schools...
GAC 20-5 (.80) - one loss was to D2...

Strength of Schedule - slight edge to CSB:
CSB - .508 - rank #189
GAC - .502 - rank #211

Opponents Winning Percentage - slight edge to CSB:
CSB - .507
GAC - .499

Opponents Opponents Winning Percentage - slight edge to CSB:
CSB - .511
GAC - .508

GAC was 2-1 against UST and CSB was 1-2.  GAC lost to Hamline who was sub-.500 this year.  GAC lost in th semis of the conference tourney and CSB lost in the title game.  But, that extra win vs. UST could give them a slight edge. Then again, CSB has 21 Division 3 wins so it is too close to call...

SO - these two look fairly even and I just do not know how the NCAA could possibly justify picking one over the other.  They will and GAC will get the nod. ..trust me...it will happen.  CSB fans will have every right to complain.  And, to be perfecrtly fair, if CSB is chosen over GAC then GAC fans would have an argument based on what I have seen.  If GAC is denied and CSB gets a bid I will be the first to say they should have BOTH either been given bids or denied bids.  The committiee will, most definitely, keep CSB out...count on it.

The only factor I can see decidely in the GAC's favor would be having their coach on the region committee and the region committee rankings are a secondary criteria.  Understandably, GAC's coach would rank GAC ahead of CSB. Can't blame her as I would do the same.  It's just unfortunate that it could possibly come down to that selection criteria because then it is not the objective process the NCAA prides itself on...

Before I get ripped too much...I hope BOTH CSB and GAC squeek into the tourney.  But, I am not optimistic for my Blazers.  Wish we could have taken care of those darn Tommies and their scholarship athletes...oops...student-athletes!!

whatever you're smoking, it most definitley is illegal. Your lack of class and respect for opponents is amazing. If you can't win on the playing field, then the other team obviously must be cheating, right?  Why not grow up and accept the fact that your beloved Bennies were beaten fairly on the playing field. case closed. You dont see people making idiotic baseless accusations of "scholarships" when talking bout your beloved SJU football, do you? 

Before reading your rant, I felt bad that CSB and GAC got left out. Now, I still feel bad that GAC got left out.

[gacbacker]

I think I remember Pat Coleman saying that the committee doesn't take geography into account when selecting teams, only when making the brackets, but I can't help but think that if Chapman gets selected instead of UM-Morris that either GAC or St. Ben's gets in.

[Willy Wonka]

Actually, a revised projection now has CSB left off...and GAC in the field.  Interesting...but not surprising given the NCAA's natural proclivity to deny CSB at-large berths  Remember - they got left out at 22-3 so this would not be a shocker.  I can understand the NCAA leaving both out but if the NCAA puts GAC in and CSB out...wow wow wow.  Please note...I am not arguing that CSB should be selected OVER GAC...they both have arguments and there is no way the committee can honestly choose one over the other...but they will...and it will be GAC.  Bank on it.  The stats are not in favor of either - it's basically a wash.  There is one intangible...   

Winning percentage - slight edge to GAC:
CSB 21-6 (.78) - all games against D3 schools...
GAC 20-5 (.80) - one loss was to D2...

Strength of Schedule - slight edge to CSB:
CSB - .508 - rank #189
GAC - .502 - rank #211

Opponents Winning Percentage - slight edge to CSB:
CSB - .507
GAC - .499

Opponents Opponents Winning Percentage - slight edge to CSB:
CSB - .511
GAC - .508

GAC was 2-1 against UST and CSB was 1-2.  GAC lost to Hamline who was sub-.500 this year.  GAC lost in th semis of the conference tourney and CSB lost in the title game.  But, that extra win vs. UST could give them a slight edge. Then again, CSB has 21 Division 3 wins so it is too close to call...

SO - these two look fairly even and I just do not know how the NCAA could possibly justify picking one over the other.  They will and GAC will get the nod. ..trust me...it will happen.  CSB fans will have every right to complain.  And, to be perfecrtly fair, if CSB is chosen over GAC then GAC fans would have an argument based on what I have seen.  If GAC is denied and CSB gets a bid I will be the first to say they should have BOTH either been given bids or denied bids.  The committiee will, most definitely, keep CSB out...count on it.

The only factor I can see decidely in the GAC's favor would be having their coach on the region committee and the region committee rankings are a secondary criteria.  Understandably, GAC's coach would rank GAC ahead of CSB. Can't blame her as I would do the same.  It's just unfortunate that it could possibly come down to that selection criteria because then it is not the objective process the NCAA prides itself on...

Before I get ripped too much...I hope BOTH CSB and GAC squeek into the tourney.  But, I am not optimistic for my Blazers.  Wish we could have taken care of those darn Tommies and their scholarship athletes...oops...student-athletes!!

whatever you're smoking, it most definitley is illegal. Your lack of class and respect for opponents is amazing. If you can't win on the playing field, then the other team obviously must be cheating, right?  Why not grow up and accept the fact that your beloved Bennies were beaten fairly on the playing field. case closed. You dont see people making idiotic baseless accusations of "scholarships" when talking bout your beloved SJU football, do you? 

Before reading your rant, I felt bad that CSB and GAC got left out. Now, I still feel bad that GAC got left out.

To be fair, UST *does* offer "academic" scholarships to a minority athlete in every varsity sport every single year. That's technically by the rules since its endowment is large enough to make it work financially...but it's an advantage the rest of the league doesn't also enjoy (or employ, if it could).

As an example, UST men's point guard (who's will be a 4-year starter next year) is paying less to be a Tommie than he would have if he accepted the full-ride offer he received to attend Bemidji State. Call me crazy, but I think he's made a difference in the Tommies' nation-best 123-19 run over the last five years.

Yes, the Tommies still have to perform on the court/field/pool/etc...but to claim they don't have a serious recruiting advantage is a little disingenuous.

[blueangel]

Wow is right!   Morriss?  Anyhow??  And I did not know that St. Thomas is able to offer a scholarship in the manner that was described.  How different is that from what WIAC does?

Sorry about ST. Bens and GA.  Seems it was going to be both or neither one.  There was really was a great deal of parity this year or the conference would not have been so even!

Go figure>>>>>>>  St. Bens is beat twice by CC; CC beats St. Thomas twice.  It could have been any of 6 teams championship and either that shows how good many of the teams are OR how simply average.  Can't tell which.

[LA RAMS]

OK, so EXACTLY how does this work anyway?  HOW DOES the NCAA Tournament Committee justify taking BOTH UM-Morris AND Northland over teams such as GAC, CSB, and Coe anyway?  I mean, if the need to select a team from the UMAC (or two for that matter) is so acute, why not take Northwestern??  THEY WON THE FREAKING UMAC TOURNAMENT!!!!  I mean, what?  That isn't enough anymore?  Geez.  I hope they AT LEAST got to go to the local DQ for ice cream sundaes afterward.  I think they deserve at least that.  Meanwhile, BOTH UM-M and Northland lost on their home floors by DOUBLE DIGITS in the UMAC tourney semifinals.  Okay, okay...To be fair here, both PROBABLY got their Dance tickets punched earlier in the year by beating perennial powererhouses Crown, North Central, and Trinity Bible College; names that, without a doubt, put the fear of God in the world of womens college basketball.  Good enough for me.  Put 'em in.

Honestly, this is the most (expletive deleted) up piece of (expletive deleted) I've ever encountered in sports; as a fan or participant.  

(Message edited by Chip Rosenbloom and Lucia Rodriguez)