MBB: Coast 2 Coast Athletic Conference

[mwcsid]

No doubt, a daunting challenge for the Eagles, facing Wartburg, and either Aurora or Oshkosh.

[mlb]

Titan Q

I appreciate the information and mean no disrespect, but their size hasn't helped them dominate their early season opponents and not all of them have been against "ranked" opponents.

I understand the "quality" of midwest/mideast basketball.  I am an Augustana (IL) grad and had a high school teammate that started on the North Park teams from 1978 - 1980.  In fact, I am very familiar with the game that Augie lost to Wabash in the 1982 championship (as I recall, it was telecast live on ESPN back before bowling and poker became primary sports).

I had the opportunity to see Aurora and Illinois Wesleyan first hand in last year's opening tournament and have been back "home" and seen many games (I have a nephew who attends Hanover as well).

I am just saying that I have actually "seen" a lot of basketball.  I have yet to see a team who dominates night in and night out.  I don't believe that the top 5 teams in the WIAC would necessarily finish that way in the ODAC or even in the CAC.  There are other teams across the nation that can more than hold their own with those teams.

In many cases, it is just a different style of basketball. 

I am still not sure that I understand how the polls are voted upon.  What is the basis for "annointing" the WIAC the "stongest" conference in the nation?  Like I said, unless the teams play head to head or unless you are able to see all the teams play, what is the basis for your vote?  It just seems to me that bias and history will drive the votes as much as any actual performance.

Finally, I would challenge that we won't have a true "national" champion in Div III basketball until the nation's best teams are included in the tournament rather than the best teams in a collection of 8 regions.

It's just my opinion, for what it's worth.

More interesting, what happens to Lincoln after losing to R-MC?  And, as importantly, St. John Fisher wasn't impressive in winning.  What happens if they lose to R-MC tomorrow?

If nothing else, it's fun debate.

[Coach C]

mlb -

I am not sure that anyone is saying that the WIAC is the strongest team in the nation this year.  And i don't think anyone has ever 'anointed' them.  When I said last year that I felt that the WIAC was the strongest team in the nation, i based it on out of conference record of the entire conference, some common opponent games, and also the balance in the top portion of the league.  It was not an anointment, rather it was a considered opinion.

The NCAA D3 tournament slection criteria and bracketing philosophy do call into question wether all of the best teams get in and get a fair shot at the Walnut and Bronze.  But i would not say that this means we don't have a "true" national champion.  It's better than D-1A football, isn't it?

As for Lincoln, ehh, let's give them a bit more time.

C

C

[Mr. Ypsi]

mlb,

A response to SOME of your points.

Since nearly all teams play SOME games out of region, cumulatively we can get a fairly good sense of regional quality - the midwest (geographically, not the Midwest region) is CLEARLY the dominant region, whether measured by inter-region games or by playoffs.

By general consensus (not by anointing!) the WIAC is usually #1, the CCIW is usually #2, and the OAC, MIAA, MIAC, NESCAC, ODAC, (and CAC?) etc., can fight it out for the next few spots.  Note I said usually!  This is again based on inter-region games and tourney results.

The d3 champ is not always the 'best' team (nor is the d1 champ!) - upsets DO happen.  But even before expansion it is doubtful that a legitimate candidate for 'best' team got left out.  This year we have 59 teams (or is it only 57?) - they will NOT all be among the best 59 teams in the country!  But I doubt that a legitimate title contender will be missing from the list.

Before Knightstalker can hammer me, the NJAC should obviously also be on that list of competitive leagues!

[Pat Coleman]

But even before expansion it is doubtful that a legitimate candidate for 'best' team got left out. 

I think Capital 2002 and Wheaton 2004 would dispute that assertion. While it definitely has not happened in football, I would say it can and has happened in basketball that a title contender has been excluded from the field.

In fact, Catholic 2001 was a last-second conference title game shot away from not making the NCAA Tournament, and they were not given a first-round bye even in winning the league. They would not have gotten in as a Pool C team.

[Mr. Ypsi]

But even before expansion it is doubtful that a legitimate candidate for 'best' team got left out. 

I think Capital 2002 and Wheaton 2004 would dispute that assertion. While it definitely has not happened in football, I would say it can and has happened in basketball that a title contender has been excluded from the field.

In fact, Catholic 2001 was a last-second conference title game shot away from not making the NCAA Tournament, and they were not given a first-round bye even in winning the league. They would not have gotten in as a Pool C team.

Notice I have been putting 'best' in quotation marks.  Even if Capital or Wheaton had gone on a run and won, do you really think they would have been the OVERALL best team that year?  And if Catholic was THAT close to not even being in the tourney, WERE they the best team?

I think we've reached a philosophical difference here.  I PREFER a playoff, and recognize the champ as THE CHAMP.  But I do NOT feel the obligation to see them as necessarily the best team (I still feel that NCSt. and Villanova should play a game to see who gets to even be in the top 25!).

BEST vs HOTTEST can be debated endlessly (and to add to the confusion, there is also best at the end, vs. hottest at the end!), but I doubt any team that could hope to win BOTH sides of the debate has been left out!.

Of course, any year IWU gets left out, I reserve the right to change my argument!

[Pat Coleman]

If the playoff system leaves them as the last team standing, I think you have to call them the best, regardless. Because unless the "best" team didn't get in the tournament, then the last team standing either beat that team, or beat a team that beat that team, etc.

[mlb]

Wow!  So many replies and so much to discuss.  Thanks!

It's unfair of me to say that the winner of the tournament is not the champion.  I was just questioning the "national" element of the invitees.

I haven't gone back and looked at schedules, but I don't see many teams from the midwest (yes, geographically) migrating east for pre-season or holiday tournaments.  Did any of the WIAC teams come east or play significant games out of region?

The tournament selection criteria seem to punish both games out of region and losses to "ranked" opponents. 

As to being no better than the D-IA football (sorry Pat), they at least have more than one poll and of course a formalized BCS rating system ( .

It's no different in D-I hoops, there are only so many at-large bids.  However, record means less and I believe that strength of schedule is far more sophisticated and important.  It is why "lesser" conferences don't get the at-large bids.  However, I also agree that Georgetown and Houston were both better than 'Nova and NC St.  Yet, as they say, that is why they play the game.

[Coach C]

mlb -

As for the BCS stat package - Oh we tried the statistical ranking thing at the D3 level.  I am not sure you have been around long enough to remember Barry Robinson's Columbus Multimedia ranking whihc used some combination of stats, margin of victory and SOS to rank teams.  It wasn't the solution either.

The WIAC teams come east, go west, bring teams in, and generally, prior to this year beat most comers.  The CCIW is perhaps better traveled, and one could argur their pre-eminence as well.

Pat - you know the "Well we beat team X by 23 and they beat team Q by 7 and they beat the eventaul national champion by 2 on a neutral court in January, so we should be ranked #1" arguement is specious.  The tournaent is imperfect, largely becasue the NCAA cant figure out how to get consistent regional rankings or a group of voters to think in a truly national mode.  Thus they create ranking and selection constructs that don't give us the best tournament we could have. 

Still, it's the best in the world!

C

[Matt Letourneau]

Good luck to CUA tonight against Moravian. 

Unfortunately, I will not be in attendence.  I am on Day 6 of a very painful kidney stone attack and am not able to leave the house.  I pray that the stone will pass soon as the pain keeps getting worse and worse.

[cuabigdog]

 Matt,

Tonights game is against McDaniel not Moravian.. I predict Cards by 10 -14

[Titan Q]

mlb, I am a "Titan" of the Illinois Wesleyan variety and not UW-Oshkosh, so believe me, no offense taken...and greetings from a fellow CCIW alumnus.

The WIAC has established itself as the #1 conference in Division III just about anyway you slice it.  Whether you look at the leagues non-conference record every season, the number of national titles (and remember, most of the league didn't come over from NAIA until the late '80s/early '90s), the record at the Final Four, or even computer-based rankings such as Massey, the WIAC comes out on top.

http://masseyratings.com/rate.php?lg=cb

(There aren't enough games built in yet for Massey to be real credible, but check out the final 2005 conference ratings and such.)

I think it is much more than just a "different style of basketball" - it is a different caliber of player.  The WIAC seems to produce more "shouldn't be in Division III" guys year-in and year-out than anyone -- in recent years, guys like Jason Kalsow (Stevens Point), Tim Dworak (Oshkosh), and Rich Melzer (River Falls).  And then from top to bottom of the league, the talent is just generally deeper than any other D3 league.  

Now, the debate has been had here on D3hoops.com many times why the WIAC gets better players (state schools with much lower tuition than the private schools, redshirting until the new D3 rule came along, etc, etc), but that doesn't change the fact that all evidence points to it being the best league.

[cuabigdog]

Catholic improves to 7-2 with their victory tonight over McDaniel with a score of 72-55.. The cards started out sloppy going into halftime down 1 (29-28)but came out strong early in the 2nd half and never lost the lead. The Cardinals return to action after the holidays Jan 4 on the road to selinsgrove, PA to take on Susquehanna then return to the DuFour Center Jan7/8 for the CUA/Pepsi Classic...

[cuainfo]

Satalin's 22 Points, Career-High Eight Rebounds
Rallies Catholic Past McDaniel, 72--55

   WASHINGTON (December 19, 2005) -- Senior Pat Satalin scored 14 of his 22 points in the second half and grabbed a career-high eight rebounds to lift Catholic University to a 72-55 victory over McDaniel College at DuFour Center on Monday.

   Satalin hit three 3-pointers during a key 14-1 run after halftime to put the Cardinals (7-2) on top, 46-40, with 11:52 to play. McDaniel (4-5), which led the entire first half, got no closer than five points the rest of the way.

   Josh McKay led the Green Terror with 22 points and six rebounds. Mike Dipiero scored 11 points, and Ryan Finch had eight rebounds.

   Patrick Dwyer totaled 18 points and a game-high nine rebounds for CUA, and Shane Sowden had 10 points, eight boards and two blocks. Dwyer scored 12 points after the break as the Cardinals erased a 29-28 halftime deficit by outscoring McDaniel 44-26 in the final 20 minutes.

   Satalin finished 6-for-11 on 3-pointers and 8 of 14 overall. He was 4 of 7 from beyond the arc in the second half. Fellow guard Mike Wasilenko contributed a game-high five assists.

   McKay, a 6-foot-8 senior center, made 7 of 14 field goals and both of his treys. Jemar Daniel's jumper with 5:09 left in the opening half gave the Green Terror their biggest lead of the game, 27-17. CUA responded with an 11-2 run that Satalin punctuated with a 3-pointer to draw the Cards within one at the break.

[mlb]

okay, my final rant (for now) on the top 25 determination.

Read today's "Daily Dose" on the cover page of D-III hoops.  The discussion is about R-MC and where a "voter" ranked them on his ballot.  Prior to this past weekend's games, he barely had them on the ballot.  He had no idea who their first team pre-season All-American (Justin Wansley) was.  He gets his information listening to the webcast (with "homer" announcers) and concludes that "Wansley is a beast".

A better solution to the "top 25" poll is to rank the schools within a "region" as it would be applied by the tournament.  This way you would have 4 polls based upon geography.  I know that the geographic regions aren't exact, but you could be close and their would be relative merit to the rankings.  The fact of the matter is, you can be in the top 15 in the nation (per the poll) and not get a bid if you don't win the automatic bid and there are only 3 or 4 slots in the region.

Only a suggestion, but the empirical evidence above indicates exactly what I thought and stated previously - the top 25 poll is not much more than a beauty contest.