BB: SCAC: Southern Collegiate Athletic Conference

[G22]

 Ralph,
The west is stronger this year. Very few, if any really weak teams. The point is Millsaps is in the South and Frank's comments are on point. Rhodes and Depauw both would be very highly regarded if you removed Millsaps from the equation . However Millsaps doesn't get much credit for beating them or the teams that Frank refers to with common opponents with Emory. The entire West division along with Rhodes and Depauw of the SCAC seem fully capable of prevailing in the South Region this year but the west teams have certainly impacted Millsaps. Tough spot.
Those of you who did not get to see Millsaps play late in the season, once the line-up got settled, really missed a great hitting team. They would have been really dangerous in a regional. But that's Baseball!

[Ralph Turner]

Welcome to the boards, G22.

Thanks for the comment. 

[frank_ezelle]

My argument, or really just an observation, centered around the point made by the tennis analogy.  The problem Millsaps has isn't with picking up more teams to play, especially more teams that are two states away.  The problem Millsaps has is that there's no way for them to compete on the field with the teams from the area that seems to dominate the rankings each year.  Those teams are so far away that even common opponents between Millsaps and the ranked teams are hard to find.

My observation is stronger with the 2006 team rather than the 2007 team since this year Millsaps is 1-3 against the ranked South teams (1-1 with Emory and 0-2 against Piedmont) and they do have 14 losses in region, but the problem is that this situation is going to have Millsaps at a disadvantage every year because they play in a tougher conference.

Looking at this year's Millsaps team, Millsaps went 8-8 in the SCAC West, a division that has 4 really solid teams plus Hendrix (and Hendrix is getting better, going 11-13 this year outside of SCAC games).  Millsaps also won 2 out of 3 against Rhodes in the crossover plus a non-conf. early season game, and then they went 3-2 at the SCAC Tournament.  That's a 14-11 record against SCAC teams. 

You get outside the SCAC and Millsaps went 1-1 with South #4 Emory and they went 0-2 against South #3 Piedmont (one an extra inning game).  Then they went 2-0 against a Huntingdon team that went 24-17, 4-0 against a 25-19 Lagrange team, 1-0 against a 32-11 Ozarks team, 3-0 against a 24-19 MS College team, 1-0 against a 32-8 Ill. Wesleyan team, 1-0 against a 20-19 Wabash team, and 1-0 against a 17-26 LA College team.

To summarize: 
--Against SCAC teams, which included all of the West Division teams and the two top teams in the East Division, Millsaps went 14-11.

--Against all other D3 teams on the schedule, which includes teams currently ranked #1, #3, and #4 in regional rankings, Millsaps went 14-3.  I should note that only one of those games was against a team that had a losing record this year (the win over LC).

--I just have a feeling that some of these teams that show up in the South rankings year after year would find that life was a little tougher if they had to play the schedule that Millsaps faced in a typical season.  I also have a feeling that things won't change any time soon and if anything, the SCAC West will probably become even tougher as the years go by.

[Ralph Turner]

...
--I just have a feeling that some of these teams that show up in the South rankings year after year would find that life was a little tougher if they had to play the schedule that Millsaps faced in a typical season.  I also have a feeling that things won't change any time soon and if anything, the SCAC West will probably become even tougher as the years go by.

Thanks for the comments.

Let's see how the Pool C teams do from the South Region.

[frank_ezelle]

...
--I just have a feeling that some of these teams that show up in the South rankings year after year would find that life was a little tougher if they had to play the schedule that Millsaps faced in a typical season.  I also have a feeling that things won't change any time soon and if anything, the SCAC West will probably become even tougher as the years go by.

Thanks for the comments.

Let's see how the Pool C teams do from the South Region.

I just want to point out that I have clearly stated that I'm not saying Millsaps is a better team than those ahead of them in the ranking, just that I think some of the teams in the SCAC, especially those in the SCAC West, have a tougher road for getting an at-large bid.  Whoever gets the Pool C bid(s) from the South will probably do fine, just as I believe Millsaps would do this year or would have done last year.

[infielddad]

Frank, unfortunately, the selection process again shows it is quite difficult and imperfect, and often times does not end up with the best teams.
For me, at least, the clearest example is the selection of Rose Hulman.
During the 8 or so years they competed in the SCAC, they never won the championship and, to the best of my recall, never even made it to the championship game.  This was true even though they often times were nationally ranked entering the tournament.
They did have good, solid teams. They were not at the top of the SCAC with Millsaps, Trinity, etc.
Now, after having left the SCAC, they are getting a group C selection.
Are we to assume they have improved so much in such a short time that they are now better than Millsaps/Rhodes, etc?  I don't think that would be the correct answer.  My expectation is that if they played Millsaps/Rhodes today, they would end up on the short end as they did all those years in the SCAC's.
Such is the vagary of the Pool C process.

[Lou_Brown]

Rose-Hulman left the SCAC for just that reason...they would NEVER make it while playing the SCAC. That is a fact. Are they a good team...yes. Better than Millsaps or Rhodes...nope.

[frank_ezelle]

infielddad, I was thinking the same thing this morning and I started to make a post, but it seemed like beating a dead horse if I brought up the subject.  I have this vague recollection that when RHIT pulled out of the SCAC, someone posted a comment that one of the big reasons for the pullout was because the baseball team was having such little success in the SCAC.  I can't remember the exact specifics but it seemed like someone with a lot of pull wanted the baseball team where they could get to the NCAA Tourrnament like they did a couple of times in the mid-90's.

Early this morning I went to see how RHIT did in baseball during their SCAC years and while they did manage to dominate the SCAC East during several seasons, they never were a huge factor in the SCAC Tournament.  From 2002 through 2006 they went 2-2, 1-2, 2-2, 0-2, and 0-2 for an overall record of 5-10 in their last 5 years in the SCAC.  

And while RHIT had a good overall athletic program while in the SCAC, they never came very close to being the top athletic program in the SCAC like they were this year in the Heartland Conference (http://www.rose-hulman.edu/sports/08commcup.htm).  Like you infielddad, I seriously doubt that RHIT would have the numbers needed to be a Pool C team if they were still in the SCAC.

AND JUST TO CLARIFY ONCE AGAIN, I'm not saying the SCAC is the toughest league in the land and I'm not saying Millsaps is better than the Pool C teams that were picked, espcially since I haven't seen any of the Pool C teams play this season.  I'm just saying that I believe some teams, like RHIT in this case, have a better shot at winning the numbers game because they play in a less competitive league or area.  That's just my opinion (and I bet that it is the opinion of folks from Emory this morning).

[frank_ezelle]

Just to update the RHIT numbers from the SCAC Tournament, in 1999 they went 2-2, in 2000 they went 0-2, and in 2001 they went 0-2.

So, while they did win 4 Eastern Division titles in 8 years (and I believe that twice they went 15-1 in Eastern Conference play), in the SCAC Tournament they were a combined 7-16 in 8 years of play and they never made the championship game and never did better than 2-2.  It does make you wonder when they get back to the NCAA Tournament so soon after leaving the SCAC.

[infielddad]

Just to update the RHIT numbers from the SCAC Tournament, in 1999 they went 2-2, in 2000 they went 0-2, and in 2001 they went 0-2.

So, while they did win 4 Eastern Division titles in 8 years (and I believe that twice they went 15-1 in Eastern Conference play), in the SCAC Tournament they were a combined 7-16 in 8 years of play and they never made the championship game and never did better than 2-2.  It does make you wonder when they get back to the NCAA Tournament so soon after leaving the SCAC.

Yup, sure makes you wonder!!  And with good justification.

[Pat Coleman]

Rose-Hulman left the SCAC for just that reason...they would NEVER make it while playing the SCAC. That is a fact.

Really, they left shortly because of baseball competitiveness? Come on now ...

[Ralph Turner]

I remember the conversations on these boards about RHIT not liking the 4-week head start that the Texas and southern teams had on them.

Competing the HCAC gave them a more level playing field with respect to cold weather.  Check out reply #9 on the first page of the SCAC board, January 12, 2006!

Point made!  RHIT seems to have benefited here from the move!

[Ron Boerger]

Rose-Hulman left the SCAC for just that reason...they would NEVER make it while playing the SCAC. That is a fact.

Really, they left shortly because of baseball competitiveness? Come on now ...

IMO left for two reasons:  (1) the stated reason of SCAC-mandated travel being too disruptive on student athletes, and (2) their general lack of competitiveness in all SCAC sports.    In just a couple of years they've gone from being a back marker in the SCAC President's Trophy (seventh nearly every year) to 1st in HCAC men/2nd women ... which does pretty well show how the two conferences compare athletically.   So they're happy and it doesn't seem to have hurt the SCAC any. 

[infielddad]

I remember the conversations on these boards about RHIT not liking the 4-week head start that the Texas and southern teams had on them.

Competing the HCAC gave them a more level playing field with respect to cold weather.  Check out reply #9 on the first page of the SCAC board, January 12, 2006!

Point made!  RHIT seems to have benefited here from the move!

Ralph, it is clear RHIT benefited.  But that also shows the DIII Championship isn't competition amongst the best 54 teams.  It is a competition based on regional and travel/cost issues.  RHIT selection this year is the very, very best demonstration that much better teams in the SCAC and ASC are sitting at home due to travel and cost issues even though they are much more talented.
To me, the RHIT selection is a focus of a continuing issue at the DIII level and in NCAA baseball.  Cost will override competition and the quality of the competition.
Why should a team like RHIT benefit from moving to lesser competition at the expense of those far more talented teams with which it was proven they cannot compete and who get left out of what is called the DIII Championships?

[frank_ezelle]

I remember the conversations on these boards about RHIT not liking the 4-week head start that the Texas and southern teams had on them.

Competing the HCAC gave them a more level playing field with respect to cold weather.  Check out reply #9 on the first page of the SCAC board, January 12, 2006!

Point made!  RHIT seems to have benefited here from the move!

Ralph, thanks for finding that set of posts.  In fairness to RHIT, the idea that they wanted to cut down on travel is a powerful argument.  We all know about the time and expense involved in SCAC travel and they have cut back on both considerably by changing conferences.  I'm sure it was a factor that it also allowed them to be a big fish in a smaller pond, but none of us can actually know how big a factor that was in the decision making process.

While on the subject of those firsts posts on this board, let me thank you and remind board members that you were a big factor in getting the baseball boards going.  As we approach 100 pages of posts in just over 2 years, it is appropriate to remember the people who were there to get this thing off the ground.  Thank you, and thanks to Jim Dixon and Pat Coleman and the many others who make a site like this possible.

Not that it matters much because the Karma totals are so high, but I'm going to make sure to give all three of you a +1 today and I wish I could give more.