MBB: Wisconsin Intercollegiate Athletic Conference

[Greek Tragedy]

My YMCA career high in a game is 6 pts.

[chmarx]

Bring the WIAC final four to the 6000 seat La Crosse Center. Plenty of good restaurants and bars, several hotels, and law enforcement personnel would be happy to know where all of us are for once.

I'd love it, but we may have gotten too good for the rest of the league to give us default home games if we reach the semis.

[John Gleich]

So two teams would get byes in the first round?   Six is an odd number to have.  I can see seven with the one seed getting a bye but with six, if they all played, you'd end up with 3 winners.  I've never seen a set up that awarded byes in the second round so you would have to have two byes in round one to make it work.   

Seven would be a far stranger bracket than six.  The WIAC has used six in other sports.  Women's soccer comes to mind.  As mentioned before, the MIAC uses six.  I assume the goal is to give the #1 and #2 a better chance of winning the AQ, which I'd be in favor of.

Link to the article: http://www.lacrossetribune.com/articles/2008/05/01/sports/00colnb.txt

Good story, but it's wrong.  Well, Coach Koelbl's quote is what I don't agree with (you won't hear me say that very often...)  I think that the underdog HAS fared decently well in the tourney.  In 2000-01, #8 Stout beat #1 Whitewater by 41.  In the same year, as noted in the story, #7 Platteville beat #2 Point.  That's the top two seeds (three actually, Oshkosh beat RF because RF decided to throw the ball off the ceiling...) losing in one year.  And, of couse, this year, #7 EC beat #2 Platte.  Also, in 99-00, the 7/2 game went to OT, with EC taking on Stout.  And in 02-03, WW/Platte was a 3 point game in the 7/2 matchup, in 06-07, LaX/Stout was 5 points.  It was a 10 point game in 03-04 and 05-06.  These games have been much, much closer than the typical 7/2 game across the country, because the league is so deep, year in and year out.

But... while the 7-2 game has been quite competitive over the years, except for the pasting by Stout of Whitewater in the year of the upset ('01), the 8/1 matchup typically hasn't been a barnburner.  Here's the margin of victory for the #1 seeds in the first round:  '99 was 11 points; '00 was 12 points; '01 was the anomaly, (-41) with #1 getting blasted; '02 was 17 points; '03 25 points; '04 13 points; '05 15 points; '06 41 points; 07 44 points 08 11 points.  Each was more than an 11 point margin of victory, but that doesn't mean it was necessarily an easy win...  Games in the 11-15 point range usually are closer until the victor puts the game away, but the proof is in the pudding... #1's have historically done the best in the tournament.

Now, I'm wondering what the implications for this would have on 1 and 2 seeds and NCAA chances.  Obviously, if a 1 or 2 losses against a 7 or 8, their NCAA "portfolio" will not be as good.  But those teams will lose a game (and a regional win) when going up against other teams nationally.

I'm also wondering how the 1 and 2 seeds will fare if they only play 2 games versus teams having to play three to win the conference tourney championship...  I think this will increase the chances that #1 or #2 wins it... that's happened every year except for 2001 (#4 EC in the year of the upset) and 2003 (#4 Oshkosh returning a Sweet 16 team from the year before that would continue on the the Elite 8 ).  Now, the one game rest could leave the 1 and 2 seeds flat... or it could leave them rested coming into their two games.  I know that for at least the NCAA tournament, Coach Bennett said he LIKED playing that first round game (as opposed to getting a first round bye and playing a team who's already had a game).  See the UWSP/Gustavus Adolphus game in 02-03.  It was our first NCAA opportunity, and we were playing top notch competition... and GAC had already had an opportunity to play once and was used to the added pressure of an NCAA game.  We got 'em back the next year, where the situation was flipped... They got the bye, we got the first round game, and we won in the second round.  Now, that logic falls the next year, as we GOT the bye and beat Lawrence in the second round, but they're still griping about the matchups for that one... but I digress...

I don't know if having the first round off in the conference tournament would really be a bad thing.  Instead of having to play 3 games in 5 (or 6) days, it would only be two... and it would be much more like the normal schedule (Sat/Wed).  And it isn't like you're playing and unknown team... these are conference teams you've already seen twice.

But, I don't know if it will really matter in the WIAC tourney for the second round game.  You're going to have a team going against a more rested, higher seeded team.  Then, if they manage to pull off the upset in that game, they're likely going to be going against another more rested team, higher ranked team, on the opponent's home court, unless the other lower seed won in the semi's as well.  Plain and simple, playing against the remaining 1 or 2 in either the semi's or finals is going to be LESS of a piece of cake than it is currently.

I wonder about this for the 3 and 4 seeds, though.  In the WIAC, there usually are 3 or 4 teams battling for the conference title, it may come down to tie-breakers for who has to play the 3/6 and 4/5 games.  I'm not sure about that one... it kind of seems like the 3 and 4 seeds get the REALLY short end of the stick.  Look at the WIAC in 01-02 with tri-champs Point, WW, and Oshy.  Whitewater was a conference champ... but would have to play another entire game to win the conference championship.  WW ended up losing to Oshkosh on a Tim Dworak 3 pointer... but what if Oshkosh hadn't played in their first game against Superior?  It was a 17 point win, not really in doubt... but the next one against River Falls was a 6 point game.  If Oshy had only played once, Whitewater would have been going against a more rested Oshkosh team and may not have been able to hang with them.

And 3/6 matchups have been tough enough over the years...  6's have won more often than not (6/10 opportunities, including 5 of the first 6 and this year), and 4/5 matchups are almost always nailbiters in any league... the WIAC is no exception.  The last two years have been 1 point games, and the three years before that the games went into OT.

All-in-all, I think that it's an interesting idea... but I'm not sure if it will allow more or fewer teams in the NCAA's in the long run.  The top 4 seeds are the teams who are going to have a shot at the Dance, and seeds 3 and 4 are still getting a tough draw against always tough 5 and 6 seeds.  1 and 2 both lose a game, and though there have been some situations where 1 or 2 has lost, they've done well historically in the tournament anyway... 8/10 championships have been won by the 1 or 2 seeds (6 for the 1 seed, 2 for the 2 seed).  Now, #2 seeds have been 6-3 in the semi's... with #1's being 6-3 (neither made it there in '01), and 1's are 6-0 in the finals already, 2's are 2-4 in the finals, with 3 losses coming against #1's and the other being #2 Whitewater against #4 seed Oshkosh in 2003.

I see this as gettin tougher for the 3's, who have only made the championship game twice (0-2), this year with Point and in 03 with Whitewater.

4's have actually fared better in the tourney title game (2-1) with the aforementioned wins and Platteville's loss in 03-04 being the other game played.

6's are the only other team that have appeared in championship games, showing up but losing in 2 of the first 3 years of the tournament (Stout losing to #1 Platte in OT in the inaugural in '99 and Oshkosh bowing to #4 EC in '01).

The biggest losers in this (not to overstate the obvious) are seeds 7 and 8.  They don't get that one last shot, that one glimmer of hope.  ... with the way this has gone (9 teams to 8, now possibly to 6), in about 10 or 15 years, I think they'll just have the regular season champ get the auto bid like the UAA and get rid of the tournament altogether!

[chmarx]

That statement wasn't by Coach Koebl.  It was in the article, uncited.  I assume that the reporter either researched it or was told that very low seed wins were rare by someone from the WIAC.

[badgerwarhawk]

The 7th and 8th seeds lose out but why should the teams that finish last and next last after the regular season even get another chance?   

[BDB]

The 7th and 8th seeds lose out but why should the teams that finish last and next last after the regular season even get another chance?   

Because this is college basketball. This is about the student athletes. Even in the Big 10 all 11 teams get into the conference tournament.

In whatever format, I think all 9 WIAC teams should get to participate in the conference tournament.

[Greek Tragedy]

Because this is college basketball. This is about the student athletes. Even in the Big 10 all 11 teams get into the conference tournament.

I'm not an expert, but I'm pretty sure that has to do with making money. 

[BDB]

Because this is college basketball. This is about the student athletes. Even in the Big 10 all 11 teams get into the conference tournament.

I'm not an expert, but I'm pretty sure that has to do with making money. 

Agreed OS. Just my 2 cents. I've always thought though that the conference shouldn't leave out the 9th place team as in the past.

Now they've decided to leave out 3. Wouldn't be my preference.

[Greek Tragedy]

I think you should have to EARN a spot to make the post season, which includes the conference tournament.  Maybe I'm comparing apples to oranges, but what if all 32 MLB teams made the playoffs?  I think it's bad enough that more than half of the NBA teams make the playoffs.  The post season seems like it's just as long as the regular season!

I do agree with you in the past, if they're going to have 8 teams in the tourney, just make it 9.  But, I still think the best bet would be 4.

[Greek Tragedy]

Wow, Stout has their schedule up already...

http://www.uwstout.edu/athletics/mbb/

Silver Lake?  Honestly.

[John Gleich]

Wow, Stout has their schedule up already...

http://www.uwstout.edu/athletics/mbb/

Silver Lake?  Honestly.

Looks like Stout is looking to move the the IIAC... potentially three games in the first 5 against IIAC opponents...

[John Gleich]

I think you should have to EARN a spot to make the post season, which includes the conference tournament.  Maybe I'm comparing apples to oranges, but what if all 32 MLB teams made the playoffs?  I think it's bad enough that more than half of the NBA teams make the playoffs.  The post season seems like it's just as long as the regular season!

I do agree with you in the past, if they're going to have 8 teams in the tourney, just make it 9.  But, I still think the best bet would be 4.

But there is a huge difference when comparing college to pro.  The Pros play in 5 or 7 game series.  In college, it's one and done.  Look at the high school ranks.  Everybody makes the state tournament in basketball.  Whether it's realistic to say to or not, every team has a shot at the state title.

I remember when I was a freshman in high school going to see a super-sectional game at Northern Illinois in 1998.  West Aurora (26-3) played Conant (15-14).  This was the 5th round of the state tournament, in a game to make it to the Elite 8!  Conant had begun the tournament with a record of 10-14, and they were playing for a shot...  now, they lost (West Aurora went on to lose in the 4th place game), but they still played their hardest and almost upset their way to glory.

[MiacLostProphet]

Question for the board.  I am a MIAC follower and was wondering if anyone had any insight on former UW-RF player Nate Robertson.  He transferred to Bethel and I was wondering what are his strengths/weaknesses and what he brings to the floor.

PS- I agree with you.  I do like in non-pro sports when all teams get a shot at the playoffs.  If there are 9 teams, why not a play in game or something?

[chmarx]

If we let everyone into the tournament, why bother with a conference season?  Just let everybody get a bunch of nonconference games and then have the tournament.

[BDB]

If we let everyone into the tournament, why bother with a conference season?  Just let everybody get a bunch of nonconference games and then have the tournament.

Under that argument, then why have a tournament at all?