MBB: Wisconsin Intercollegiate Athletic Conference

[Greek Tragedy]

Stoutguy,

ShineTime amuses me. He's not getting under my skin at all.

[iwumichigander]

Whitewater looked dominating tonight from what I was told and the game was never in doubt.  How can a team with that much talent ever lose and not win every game by 15 or more?  They are basically uw Milwaukee B

Please just STOP IT.  I was there.  Whoever told you that doesn't know what they are talking about and you're repeating it here makes you appear equally clueless.

I wasn't there either but parts of what he said was a nugget of truth.   

What part? 

Apparently the "from what I was told" part 

[fredfalcon]

stoutguy--interesting post. Have a very good vacation in ?? Mexico? I thought Stout gave a very good account of themselves.

[Mr. Ypsi]

Stoutguy,

ShineTime amuses me. He's not getting under my skin at all.

He does get a bit carried away.  But, alas, he doesn't seem to be all that excitable about it.  I doubt we're gonna get a TGHIJGSTO out of him!

[Gregory Sager]

Whitewater looked dominating tonight from what I was told and the game was never in doubt.  How can a team with that much talent ever lose and not win every game by 15 or more?  They are basically uw Milwaukee B

Please just STOP IT.  I was there.  Whoever told you that doesn't know what they are talking about and you're repeating it here makes you appear equally clueless.

I wasn't there either but parts of what he said was a nugget of truth.   

What part? 

Apparently the "from what I was told" part 

LOL!

[RedHotFalcon]

He was also frustrated with (and has complained officially about physical nature of RF players being allowed to be physical because they are so strong.)  Thought that RF should be rated #1 in country.
[/quote]

That is funny. Refs started the game not blowing the whistle, at all, with some obvious ones.  Both teams could have used one. Stout was as physical as UWRF and competed. UWRF is much deeper. Stout Big, I think #3, was walking down the court with hands on head, trying to get air and then to his knees. He needed one, there just wasn't anyone there.

[John Gleich]

With RF (seemingly) in control at the halfway mark... How young are they? If they can keep this lead, plus with the new gym coming soon, could keep RF near the top for a while.

Any SP future talk is speculation... but it's interesting that the women's title from '15 had already been vacated (further interesting that this Natty C was won in Stevens Point). I have to believe that the women's title vacation was pretty much required because they used an ineligible player (as it was determined after the fact). Unless the NCAA findings end up declaring participating players as ineligible, I don't see how the Bronze and Walnut (4th Ed.) would really be in jeopardy.

Perhaps that's wishful thinking... But between that and speculation, that's all I've got.

Now go out and bring those Falcons back to earth!

[stoutguy]

With RF (seemingly) in control at the halfway mark... How young are they? If they can keep this lead, plus with the new gym coming soon, could keep RF near the top for a while.

Any SP future talk is speculation... but it's interesting that the women's title from '15 had already been vacated (further interesting that this Natty C was won in Stevens Point). I have to believe that the women's title vacation was pretty much required because they used an ineligible player (as it was determined after the fact). Unless the NCAA findings end up declaring participating players as ineligible, I don't see how the Bronze and Walnut (4th Ed.) would really be in jeopardy.

Perhaps that's wishful thinking... But between that and speculation, that's all I've got.

Now go out and bring those Falcons back to earth!

It would be my take that RF is going to be very tough to bring back to earth.  Jeff seems to be doing an amazing job of keeping local talent and increasing the radius of that local talent.  He has always done well in the Minnesota recruits and this year two of his best players are from  Hudson and Prescott.  Add this to the new facility next year and his recruiting will only get better.  I say RF is going to be up near the top for awhile.   I suppose I could do a "ShineTime" thing and proclaim them undefeated this year and a lock for years to come, but then Fredfalcon would get mad at me!

[Just Bill]

Any SP future talk is speculation... but it's interesting that the women's title from '15 had already been vacated (further interesting that this Natty C was won in Stevens Point). I have to believe that the women's title vacation was pretty much required because they used an ineligible player (as it was determined after the fact). Unless the NCAA findings end up declaring participating players as ineligible, I don't see how the Bronze and Walnut (4th Ed.) would really be in jeopardy.

Perhaps that's wishful thinking... But between that and speculation, that's all I've got.

I think it's wishful thinking. I think the Thomas More case represents an "incident" while the UWSP case represents a complete culture problem. Other than the current AD who just arrived, I don't think anyone at Stevens Point has totally grasped the size of the turd they've stepped in. And they don't realize it because, it's just been standard operating procedure for a number of years. I think Bennett's quote in the paper shows what a lack of awareness of the severity of the violations they have. It's not jaywalking.

I think they're going to get crushed.

[badgerwarhawk]

Any SP future talk is speculation... but it's interesting that the women's title from '15 had already been vacated (further interesting that this Natty C was won in Stevens Point). I have to believe that the women's title vacation was pretty much required because they used an ineligible player (as it was determined after the fact). Unless the NCAA findings end up declaring participating players as ineligible, I don't see how the Bronze and Walnut (4th Ed.) would really be in jeopardy.

Perhaps that's wishful thinking... But between that and speculation, that's all I've got.

I think it's wishful thinking. I think the Thomas More case represents an "incident" while the UWSP case represents a complete culture problem. Other than the current AD who just arrived, I don't think anyone at Stevens Point has totally grasped the size of the turd they've stepped in. And they don't realize it because, it's just been standard operating procedure for a number of years. I think Bennett's quote in the paper shows what a lack of awareness of the severity of the violations they have. It's not jaywalking.

I think they're going to get crushed.

This is pretty much the way I see it too. 

[Dave 'd-mac' McHugh]

Any SP future talk is speculation... but it's interesting that the women's title from '15 had already been vacated (further interesting that this Natty C was won in Stevens Point). I have to believe that the women's title vacation was pretty much required because they used an ineligible player (as it was determined after the fact). Unless the NCAA findings end up declaring participating players as ineligible, I don't see how the Bronze and Walnut (4th Ed.) would really be in jeopardy.

Perhaps that's wishful thinking... But between that and speculation, that's all I've got.

I think it's wishful thinking. I think the Thomas More case represents an "incident" while the UWSP case represents a complete culture problem. Other than the current AD who just arrived, I don't think anyone at Stevens Point has totally grasped the size of the turd they've stepped in. And they don't realize it because, it's just been standard operating procedure for a number of years. I think Bennett's quote in the paper shows what a lack of awareness of the severity of the violations they have. It's not jaywalking.

I think they're going to get crushed.

Agreed that Thomas More was an incident versus a culture at UWSP, however from what I have learned, I think we will all discover in the report that there are some at UWSP (outside of the new AD who won't be part of the report) who were absolutely aware and doing their best to curtail the problem. I think there were some who absolutely knew the "size of the turd" that was being created and were trying to stop it. I think that will end up being the most telling part of the report when we finally see it... that basically warnings were ignored or dismissed. That's just what I have gathered from chats I have had with a lot of people.

As for the Walnut and Bronze, I have said it on Hoopsville before - I could see both sides of the argument on whether it is taken away. TMC lost theirs primarily because of an ineligible player (don't get me started on why I think that is flawed). UWSP didn't have ineligible players, as best we know. So no, there is no reason on this basis for the title to be pulled.

However, the other side of the argument is this: ask any coach (especially not close to this) on whether "extra" practices and evaluation have any affect on success and almost every single one I have talked to have said it absolutely does have an affect. There is less work at the beginning of the preseason to get certain things in place, which allows for the more difficult stuff to get installed sooner, and so and so on... this results in a team being in better position when the season begins meaning UWSP could have won games earlier on that better positions themselves come February and March when decisions on at-large and hosting opportunities are determined which could better their run through the tournament towards a championship. There are quite a few coaches who have made that argument to me. Add in this is a repeat offense, the years in question encompass the championship year, and the fact that while all rules are considered major this rule is a tent poll of Division III. I could see this argument winning out as well.

I pretty much could see both sides of the argument on whether the title is pulled or not. Depending on the day, I would be on either side of that fence.

[John Gleich]

As for the Walnut and Bronze, I have said it on Hoopsville before - I could see both sides of the argument on whether it is taken away. TMC lost theirs primarily because of an ineligible player (don't get me started on why I think that is flawed). UWSP didn't have ineligible players, as best we know. So no, there is no reason on this basis for the title to be pulled.

Have you ever heard of any other reason for wins to be vacated? I've heard of numerous situations in some way similar to the TMC situation (action A occurred... falsified records, failed class, improper gifts, etc, and thus player B is ineligible, thus all games that player B played in are vacated).

Perhaps they exist (and I'm talking NCAA-wide, not even just d-3), I just haven't heard of them.

this results in a team being in better position when the season begins meaning UWSP could have won games earlier on that better positions themselves come February and March when decisions on at-large and hosting opportunities are determined which could better their run through the tournament towards a championship.

Please note - the following statement has absolutely, positively ZERO bearing on culpability, the offense, the punishment, etc. I just find it interesting.

When you look at SP's season in 2015, they started off average, at best.

11/15/14 - Beat St. Johns 70-59
11/19/14 - Lost to St. Olaf 70-69
11/22/14 - Beat Hope 77-66
11/25/14 - Beat Edgewood 69-60 (OT)
11/29/14 - Lost to North Central 63-56
12/03/14 - Beat Eau Claire 64-50
12/06/14 - Beat Superior 77-54
12/10/14 - Beat Stout 73-56
12/13/14 - Beat Lawrence 60-49
12/20/14 - Lost to St. Thomas 68-66

So, Point went a rather underwhelming 7-3 in their first 10 and didn't arrive at the seven wins all that impressively.

Interestingly, here were their rankings:
Preseason: #7
Week 1 (11/23): #11 (2-1)
Week 2 (11/30): #23 (3-2)
Week 3 (12/07): #21 (5-2)
Week 4 (12/14): #20 (7-2)
Week 5 (01/04): #19 (9-3)

Then they rattled off 6-1 and 8-1 stretches and rose as high as #15 (before loss #4 in Week 8) and #4 (before loss #5 in Week 13). They were 21-5, #8 going into the NCAA tournament.

Then they rattled off a very impressive NCAA tournament. Granted, four of these games were in Stevens Point. But the data doesn't appear to back up a claim that they did better in the early going by having extra practices...  UNLESS they simply weren't going to be that good (which is an argument I heard made early on as they were struggling... they did, after all, lost two All-Americans). And yet, they were still able to put together the run that they did and to come together as a team as they did.

Anyway, just interesting to look at. Has no bearing on the case, but I noticed this the other day and thought I'd share.

[fredfalcon]

The likelihood of any team going unbeaten through the WIAC is low.

[Dave 'd-mac' McHugh]

As for the Walnut and Bronze, I have said it on Hoopsville before - I could see both sides of the argument on whether it is taken away. TMC lost theirs primarily because of an ineligible player (don't get me started on why I think that is flawed). UWSP didn't have ineligible players, as best we know. So no, there is no reason on this basis for the title to be pulled.

Have you ever heard of any other reason for wins to be vacated? I've heard of numerous situations in some way similar to the TMC situation (action A occurred... falsified records, failed class, improper gifts, etc, and thus player B is ineligible, thus all games that player B played in are vacated).

Perhaps they exist (and I'm talking NCAA-wide, not even just d-3), I just haven't heard of them.

Not following the question. As it pertains to UWSP and reasons to vacate wins? Or any situation and thus like TMC's?

The best I can answer now is the reason TMC's wins were apparently vacated is because they had an ineligible player playing. One could argue that if a bench player was ineligible the same applies, but I get the feeling from the TMC report was that because they considered Moss to be "elite" (they used that word at least three times; I contend it shouldn't matter the level of a player), they vacated any game she was involved in. I know this has happened across the NCAA in the past, but I can't speak to the differences in when wins are vacated and not when there is an ineligible player.

My argument in this case is that I will contend she was ineligible in November and December when she was staying with the assistant coach which was deemed later to be illegal. So be it. However, she then became "eligible" in all intensive purposes because she no longer was at the coach's house starting in January. However, the report found her ineligible because she didn't go through the re-eligibilty program (which she did when she missed five games at the start of last season). This is where I have a problem. The NCAA was told by an anonymous source of a problem in February of that season (4-7 weeks after she moved back into her apartment). They did not tell the school. They got more info from the source in June. Did not tell the school. They finally told the school in August of 2015 there was a problem and they were investigating. IF they had told the school of the issue, the department and team could have made a determination of whether to pull Moss and put her through the re-eligibity program or not pull her because they felt they were in the right. They didn't give the school that chance. So Moss continued to play and the NCAA, I feel, punished them twice despite the fact the school had no idea she was considered ineligible. It is an after-the-fact punishment. Granted a lot of those occur, but considering she was by definition eligible from January onward and the NCAA did not take the steps to alert the school so they could make the best decision possible... the NCAA still punished them. THAT is why I have a problem with the championship being pulled and the entire season basically vacated.

(not to mention the fact, she was still paying rent on her old apartment the entire time she stayed at the assistant coach's house which I think negates the $5000 in benefits the NCAA "found.")

this results in a team being in better position when the season begins meaning UWSP could have won games earlier on that better positions themselves come February and March when decisions on at-large and hosting opportunities are determined which could better their run through the tournament towards a championship.
[/quote]

Please note - the following statement has absolutely, positively ZERO bearing on culpability, the offense, the punishment, etc. I just find it interesting.

When you look at SP's season in 2015, they started off average, at best.

11/15/14 - Beat St. Johns 70-59
11/19/14 - Lost to St. Olaf 70-69
11/22/14 - Beat Hope 77-66
11/25/14 - Beat Edgewood 69-60 (OT)
11/29/14 - Lost to North Central 63-56
12/03/14 - Beat Eau Claire 64-50
12/06/14 - Beat Superior 77-54
12/10/14 - Beat Stout 73-56
12/13/14 - Beat Lawrence 60-49
12/20/14 - Lost to St. Thomas 68-66

So, Point went a rather underwhelming 7-3 in their first 10 and didn't arrive at the seven wins all that impressively.

Interestingly, here were their rankings:
Preseason: #7
Week 1 (11/23): #11 (2-1)
Week 2 (11/30): #23 (3-2)
Week 3 (12/07): #21 (5-2)
Week 4 (12/14): #20 (7-2)
Week 5 (01/04): #19 (9-3)

Then they rattled off 6-1 and 8-1 stretches and rose as high as #15 (before loss #4 in Week 8) and #4 (before loss #5 in Week 13). They were 21-5, #8 going into the NCAA tournament.

Then they rattled off a very impressive NCAA tournament. Granted, four of these games were in Stevens Point. But the data doesn't appear to back up a claim that they did better in the early going by having extra practices...  UNLESS they simply weren't going to be that good (which is an argument I heard made early on as they were struggling... they did, after all, lost two All-Americans). And yet, they were still able to put together the run that they did and to come together as a team as they did.

Anyway, just interesting to look at. Has no bearing on the case, but I noticed this the other day and thought I'd share.

I certainly by no means want to indicate that is exactly what happened to UWSP and thus why I can see all sides of the argument. I didn't vote for UWSP in my Top 25 until mid to late January that season. I know the season they had. My description was basically what coaches will tell you are the benefits of having these "practices" out of season. However, I would contend you could argue UWSP has a rougher start to the season which ends almost any chance of them hosting four games in the NCAA tournament. That is what that side of the argument would be.

[Gregory Sager]

Any SP future talk is speculation... but it's interesting that the women's title from '15 had already been vacated (further interesting that this Natty C was won in Stevens Point). I have to believe that the women's title vacation was pretty much required because they used an ineligible player (as it was determined after the fact). Unless the NCAA findings end up declaring participating players as ineligible, I don't see how the Bronze and Walnut (4th Ed.) would really be in jeopardy.

Perhaps that's wishful thinking... But between that and speculation, that's all I've got.

I think it's wishful thinking. I think the Thomas More case represents an "incident" while the UWSP case represents a complete culture problem. Other than the current AD who just arrived, I don't think anyone at Stevens Point has totally grasped the size of the turd they've stepped in. And they don't realize it because, it's just been standard operating procedure for a number of years. I think Bennett's quote in the paper shows what a lack of awareness of the severity of the violations they have. It's not jaywalking.

I think they're going to get crushed.

This is pretty much the way I see it too.

Ditto.

I think there were some who absolutely knew the "size of the turd" that was being created and were trying to stop it.

I know that I shouldn't let my inner eight-year-old write posts for me anywhere other than the D3 Championship Belt room, but that phrase becomes even funnier when you put quotes around it.

The likelihood of any team going unbeaten through the WIAC is low.

You just took yourself right off of ShineTime's Christmas card list, Fred.

Please note - the following statement has absolutely, positively ZERO bearing on culpability, the offense, the punishment, etc. I just find it interesting.

When you look at SP's season in 2015, they started off average, at best.

11/15/14 - Beat St. Johns 70-59
11/19/14 - Lost to St. Olaf 70-69
11/22/14 - Beat Hope 77-66
11/25/14 - Beat Edgewood 69-60 (OT)
11/29/14 - Lost to North Central 63-56
12/03/14 - Beat Eau Claire 64-50
12/06/14 - Beat Superior 77-54
12/10/14 - Beat Stout 73-56
12/13/14 - Beat Lawrence 60-49
12/20/14 - Lost to St. Thomas 68-66

So, Point went a rather underwhelming 7-3 in their first 10 and didn't arrive at the seven wins all that impressively.

Interestingly, here were their rankings:
Preseason: #7
Week 1 (11/23): #11 (2-1)
Week 2 (11/30): #23 (3-2)
Week 3 (12/07): #21 (5-2)
Week 4 (12/14): #20 (7-2)
Week 5 (01/04): #19 (9-3)

Then they rattled off 6-1 and 8-1 stretches and rose as high as #15 (before loss #4 in Week 8) and #4 (before loss #5 in Week 13). They were 21-5, #8 going into the NCAA tournament.

Then they rattled off a very impressive NCAA tournament. Granted, four of these games were in Stevens Point. But the data doesn't appear to back up a claim that they did better in the early going by having extra practices...  UNLESS they simply weren't going to be that good (which is an argument I heard made early on as they were struggling... they did, after all, lost two All-Americans). And yet, they were still able to put together the run that they did and to come together as a team as they did.

Anyway, just interesting to look at. Has no bearing on the case, but I noticed this the other day and thought I'd share.

I certainly by no means want to indicate that is exactly what happened to UWSP and thus why I can see all sides of the argument. I didn't vote for UWSP in my Top 25 until mid to late January that season. I know the season they had. My description was basically what coaches will tell you are the benefits of having these "practices" out of season. However, I would contend you could argue UWSP has a rougher start to the season which ends almost any chance of them hosting four games in the NCAA tournament. That is what that side of the argument would be.

That's the way I read it, too. Anybody who is making the case that UWSP got an unfair head start to the season could counter John's argument by saying that the Pointers were better prepared to handle that overtime game in November against Edgewood than the Eagles were. And perhaps the Pointers were better prepped to nip Claremont-Mudd-Scripps by six in southern California on New Year's Eve (it was a two-point game with eighteen seconds left). And so on. While the Pointers generally won their games by healthy margins -- which, in and of itself you could argue was influenced by the head start afforded to them by the illegal practices -- there were nevertheless games like the two I mentioned that could've gone the other way and thus affected UWSP's status at the end of the regular season.

However, she then became "eligible" in all intensive purposes because she no longer was at the coach's house starting in January.

It's "all intents and purposes", D-Mac, not "all intensive purposes".