Pool C

patcummings · February 27, 2006, 12:32:40 AM

Bates was 0-4 against regionally ranked teams. Lax was the last team in, but in our minds, it really wasn't a question.

I'd say we are somewhat surprised by Oxy over Trinity, but things washed out a bit. The common opponent in Amherst along with regional records was a wash, and at the end of the day, Oxy and Trinity CT had the same regional win %, same QOWI, and I believe the same .500 record v. regionally ranked teams.

One of the potential criteria is to allow the committee to weigh the last 25% of the schedule more heavily...that clearly didn't happen with Oxy men. Thought is the committee would try to avoid Oxy/CMS in the first round (but I would believe anything).

Chapman just didn't have it...regional win percentage for Villa Julie was 2nd strongest of the Pool B's behind Bethany and it was rewarded. Chapman's QOWI was significantly lower than Maryville's who had a lower regional winning percentage.

The main question Huntingdon will ask themselves...we had a 2-1 record against MC and beat them twice in the last two weeks and didn't get in.

Still

starstar · February 27, 2006, 12:42:32 AM

where will utica be going thursday??? or fisher?

Pat Coleman · February 27, 2006, 12:50:48 AM

Perhaps nowhere. Most first-round games are on Friday this year.

Mr. Ypsi · February 27, 2006, 12:51:29 AM

Quote from: Titan Q on February 27, 2006, 12:25:40 AM
Chuck, the selection committee has never allowed geography to affect selections. The bracket, yes...selections, no. They weren't going to put Chapman in just to create a pod.

I expect a Thursday game of Oxy vs C-M-S with the winner going to a bye team - the rules allow two conference teams to play if the geography makes it necessary. In this case, it's probably the only way to do it.

Personally, I'm volunteering to send Illinois Wesleyan to Occidental Thursday, with the winner to Claremont-Mudd-Scripps Saturday. Win or lose, the weather is a whole lot better.

To quote Ralph:

I wish I could make those (highly hypothetical) games!

patcummings,

I understand that d3 criteria do not include what you are doing at the end of the year. To me that is a BIG mistake, but by season totals, I have no problem with Oxy being in (until 2 weeks ago, I was voting for them in the PP) - chances are, barring a HUGE turnaround, they will not be in for long.

Ralph Turner · February 27, 2006, 01:28:08 AM

Quote from: Titan Q on February 27, 2006, 12:25:40 AM
...
Personally, I'm volunteering to send Illinois Wesleyan to Occidental Thursday, with the winner to Claremont-Mudd-Scripps Saturday. Win or lose, the weather is a whole lot better.

Q, your dedication and thoughtfulness with respect to the health and well-being of IWU basketball is commendable. You always have the "Greenies" best interests at heart.

Greenies...greens...

Say, I wonder if you could get 18 holes in while you were out there.

Ralph Turner · February 27, 2006, 01:32:15 AM

Quote from: patcummings on February 27, 2006, 12:32:40 AM
...
The main question Huntingdon will ask themselves...we had a 2-1 record against MC and beat them twice in the last two weeks (and regionally ranked Fisk 2-1 and twice in the last 2 weeks) and didn't get in.

Still

I feel very badly for Huntingdon.

Mr. Ypsi · February 27, 2006, 01:33:19 AM

Ralph,

Heck, with Q, I guarantee he could get in AT LEAST 96 holes - probably more!

Ralph Turner · February 27, 2006, 01:34:34 AM

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on February 27, 2006, 01:33:19 AM
Ralph,

Heck, with Q, I guarantee he could get in AT LEAST 96 holes - probably more!

I admire the man's altruism!

macdaddy · February 27, 2006, 01:37:32 AM

To the people who are making projections for Thursday's games, aren't those games for all intents and purposes basically play in game. My question is aren't those games for instance would be in the midwest region, Wisconsin Lutheran and say Buenea Vista playing with the winner going to Lawrence. Or is it as some of you are saying like Lacrosse and North Central playing with that team going to Lawrence. Just trying to figure out how this all works this year.

I guess we truly will not know until the morning how they are doing things. I read on the faq's part of D3hoops that those Thursday games would br # 8 and #9 seeds playing. Just a question thanks for any responses...

Pat Coleman · February 27, 2006, 01:41:17 AM

Yes, 8 and 9 types out of 14-15 teams in four brackets. So it's not like the D-I play-in game, with 64 and 65 playing off to get crushed by No. 1, it's like any other D-I bracket except No. 16 didn't get invited.

macdaddy · February 27, 2006, 01:43:27 AM

Got it thanks for the help Pat. Makes sense to me.

Mr. Ypsi · February 27, 2006, 02:09:38 AM

Quote from: macdaddy on February 27, 2006, 01:37:32 AM
To the people who are making projections for Thursday's games, aren't those games for all intents and purposes basically play in game. My question is aren't those games for instance would be in the midwest region, Wisconsin Lutheran and say Buenea Vista playing with the winner going to Lawrence. Or is it as some of you are saying like Lacrosse and North Central playing with that team going to Lawrence. Just trying to figure out how this all works this year.

I guess we truly will not know until the morning how they are doing things. I read on the faq's part of D3hoops that those Thursday games would br # 8 and #9 seeds playing. Just a question thanks for any responses...

They are NOT play in games in the d1 sense, but more like a 4/5 game in an 8 game tourney. The winner will play at the team that had a bye. The winner of that game plus the winner from the other three games (2-7, 3-6, winners) will advance to the sectional (most teams will play a full 1-8, 4-5; 2-7 3-6, regional). There are four sectionals (consisting of the top two teams from each of the eight regionals) - the four sectional winners go to Salem for the championship.

Depending upon regional 'partner', playing early may mean you are anywhere between 4th and 13th (of the up to 16 in your sectional).

Gregory Sager · February 27, 2006, 03:35:41 AM

Quote from: Ralph Turner on February 26, 2006, 11:35:14 PM17 for 18 on Pool C , but only 2-4 on Pool B.

I hope that I have learned my lesson. The numbers are the numbers, and there is very little subjective input that I can see.

I was going to post Pool B picks, but I ended up deferring to you on that score, Ralph, since you've followed Pool B closer than anyone this season.

I ended up picking 15 out of 18, but I admit that that was only after I was reminded that it was UW-LaCrosse that beat both Carleton and St. Thomas, not UW-Stout. I wrote it down the right way on my cheat sheet as I went through each team's schedule, but when I filled out the column for likely in-region results against regionally-ranked teams I transposed the two WIAC teams. Later on, I figured out why: UW-Stout and St. Thomas traveled all the way to eastern Ohio on the season's opening weekend and participated in a tournament at Wooster, where they faced each other in the opening round. That game and tournament stuck out in my head (probably because I spent too much time this year on the Wooster 24/7 Channel, otherwise known as the NCAC room

), and I just stuck a mythical Carleton vs. UW-Stout game on top of it. After being reminded that it was the Eagles that played Carleton and not the Blue Devils, I moved UWL into my 18th and last spot ahead of Bates. As it was, though, I got Utica, Randolph-Macon, and Occidental wrong, putting in Lakeland, Wash U, and Trinity (CT) instead.

As for the in-region results against ranked teams criterion, the way the rule was explained to me by someone who has served on a regional committee was that it was designed to give the national committee some flexibility in weighing those games, along the lines of giving a team that was 1-3 against such teams room for argument against a team that went 1-4 against such teams if the 1-3 team's win was against a #1 opponent and the 1-4 team's win was against a #6 opponent. Even though it turned out to be a moot point, the idea of a 1-4 team getting credit for that one win and absolutely no penalty for the four losses, over and against an 0-0 team, still strikes me as a gross misreading of that rule.

Gregory Sager · February 27, 2006, 04:07:29 AM

Quote from: PointSpecial on February 27, 2006, 12:11:32 AM
I haven't checked the Regional Rankings from last week... but is it possible that La Crosse was just "up to bat" sooner than some of the other possible teams? We don't know where they were ranked in the West... but for me, at least, the fact that the would have been ranked, relative to their regional foes, ahead of particularly Lakeland was the (a?) reason (among others?) why they were picked over the Muskies...

My guess is that you hit the nail on the head, PS.

Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) · February 27, 2006, 08:21:03 AM

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on February 27, 2006, 12:51:29 AM
I understand that d3 criteria do not include what you are doing at the end of the year.

It's one of the secondary criteria, if they choose to use it.

I got 16-18 and 3-4. I didn't think Villa Julie would make it, but then again, I didn't look at the numbers again after the GSAC tourney, so its my own fault. Whatever, I'm pretty happy. I wish I could have gone without sleep like the rest of you and done a bracket projection last night.