MBB: Old Dominion Athletic Conference

[David Collinge]

Any formula that gives the result that the NCAC is a "power conference" is a formula that should be discarded. 

[FISHTANKFAN]

njlincolnlion,                                                                                                                        I think Lincoln will have their hands full with Guilford.  The Quakers have been playing exceptional basketball lately and want the win badly.  If they play anything like their last two games, it should be a real battle.  The Marlins aren't looking past Mississippi I can assure you.  If they win..then they will worry about Guilford or Lincoln but beating Mississippi will be the only thing the Marlins will be concentrating on this week.  One game at a time is why the Marlins have been so successful.  Coach Macedo and his staff will have the players ready. It's going to be a very "Sweet16" weekend.  Good Luck to all.  

[algernon]

Any formula that gives the result that the NCAC is a "power conference" is a formula that should be discarded. 

David ... You seem to have a great sense of the national scene.  Which conferences would you rate as "power conferences"?  Which would you rate as "borderline power conferences"?  I'd be interested in your opinion.

[Titan Q]

Counting Final Four appearances might be a good measure of "power conferences" in Division I, but it doesn't work in Division III.  Because of the way the selection process works and how the brackets are constructed, the playing field is not level.  The road a NESCAC team, for example, faces in getting to Salem is just simply much easier than the road faced by a West, Midwest, or Great Lakes team.

The team I follow, Illinois Wesleyan, has faced a top 5 ranked (D3hoops.com Top 25) team in Round 4 or earlier 6 times this decade already:

(D3hoops.com ranking at the time of the game)

2006 - @ (#1) Lawrence (Round 3)
2004 - @ (#2) Hanover (Round 2), @ (#4) Wooster (Round 3)
2003 - @ (#2) Wash U (Round 2), vs (#4) Hampden-Sydney (Round 3)
2001 - @ (#1) Chicago (Round 4)


Go back and look at some NESCAC roads and see how they compare.

[Titan Q]

Massey Index currently has:

1) CCIW
2) WIAC
3) UAA
4) OAC
5) HCAC


http://www.mratings.com/rate.php?lg=cb&sub=III&mid=1#conf

[Mr. Ypsi]

Any formula that gives the result that the NCAC is a "power conference" is a formula that should be discarded. 

David ... You seem to have a great sense of the national scene.  Which conferences would you rate as "power conferences"?  Which would you rate as "borderline power conferences"?  I'd be interested in your opinion.

I'm not David, obviously, and would welcome his views, but I'll take a stab at it (though my fellow IWU alum, Titan Q, already beat me to it).

Traditionally, year-after-year with occasional interlopers, the consensus seems to be that the WIAC is #1, the CCIW is #2, and a cluster of conferences battle for #3.  Among the latter would be the OAC, the NJAC (though they may have faded a bit recently), and (often) the UAC, the NESCAC, and perhaps one or two others.  The NCAC is probably the most 'split' conference - two perennial top 10 teams (Wittenberg and Wooster, the #1 and #2 all-time winningest schools), but a really dreadful bottom half.

I'd say that the ODAC (usually) is about with the MIAA and MIAC - usually the top 2-3 teams are legitimate top 35 teams (with often a top 5!), but top-to-bottom near the lower end of the top ten conferences.

[David Collinge]

Any formula that gives the result that the NCAC is a "power conference" is a formula that should be discarded. 

David ... You seem to have a great sense of the national scene.  Which conferences would you rate as "power conferences"?  Which would you rate as "borderline power conferences"?  I'd be interested in your opinion.

Someone, I think in here, tried to get me to answer a similar question last week or the week before, and instead I gave a song-and-dance routine.  I'll do it again now.  Maestro, if you please.  A-five-six-seven-eight...

I think this is a fruitless discussion.  One problem is that the phrase "power conference" can have almost whatever meaning you choose to assign to it.  If you compare the top teams, then yes, even the NCAC is a "power conference" in men's basketball, as Wooster and/or Wittenberg are always among the very best teams in D3.  If you compare the top-to-bottom strength, however, the NCAC vanishes like a dead dandelion in a gale.  Some would even judge a conference's strength based on how good the worst team is.  If you apply that rule to the NCAC, you start talking about Oberlin...if Jim Loesel ever comes back, ask him about Oberlin.    But you see the problem: by one definition, the NCAC is one of the top three or four conferences, while by another definition, it's one of the bottom three or four conferences.

Another problem is the dearth of head-to-head results on which to base an evaluation.  If I want to compare the NCAC with the ODAC, how do I go about doing so?  Do I compare Wooster or Wittenberg to Hampden-Sydney or Virginia Wesleyan?  They've rarely played.  Do I compare Oberlin and Hiram to Lynchburg and W&L (no offense intended)?  They've rarely played.  Do I compare the total NCAC vs. ODAC results?  Okay, Wooster beat the crap out of E&H last year, so I guess we're better than you.  Nyah nyah.    Oh wait, W&L beat Oberlin and Denison this year, so I guess you're better than us now.  Rats. 

Even if there were head-to-head matchups to evaluate, such as the ODAC and USASAC seem to have, is it valid to use these results to praise or damn an entire conference?  Sure, if Oberlin played HSC every year and routinely won, I think you could conclude that the NCAC is better than the ODAC.  But what result if Ohio Wesleyan and Virginia Wesleyan played every year--would the result tell you which conference is better, or just which team?  Heck, even that's not always correct--who here thinks Bridgewater is really a better team than Guilford?

My major problem is that I think the whole question is a fool's errand.  I'm much more concerned about which are the power teams than which are the power conferences.  (And despite my obsession with the top 25, I'm not all that concerned about who the power teams are, so you can deduce my level of interest in comparing conferences.)  They don't give out trophies for being a member of the best conference, much to the evident dismay of some of my friends from the middle west.   

I'm intensely proud of my conference, not because their 1st or 3rd or 6th or 9th place team is good at this sport or that sport, but because they maintain a rigorously high academic standard, because they promote gender equity by sanctioning championships in eleven varsity sports for each gender, and because they emphasize athletics as a compliment to academics and other extracurricular activities as a means to help develop the minds and bodies of the next generation of leaders in our country.  That's not to suggest that other conferences are not as good or better than the NCAC in this regard; if in fact they are, then that's great--we all win.

[algernon]

Thanks to all of you ... David Collinge, Mr. Ypsi, and Titan Q ... for your responses, all of which were interesting.  I agree with you, David, that the subject seems somewhat meaningless, for the variety of reasons you have mentioned.

However, I continue to see the idea of "power conferences" frequently thrown out there on d3hoops.com and I find it increasingly hard to understand the failure to refer to the ODAC.  Maybe I'll find the time to look at it more closely at some point and find that I'm wrong, but my sense is that Hampden-Sydney and Virginia Wesleyan have done just fine against teams like Illinois Wesleyan and Wooster and the UW teams that have made it into the tournament, while lower ranked teams such as Washington and Lee have done just fine against the likes of Denison and Oberlin ..... I think the current ODAC could play an "interleague schedule" against any of the conferences that have been mentioned as power conferences and come out pretty much even .... and that continued references to "power conferences" across d3hoops that exclude the ODAC are based upon historical performance.

What would we find if we looked only at how the ODAC has performed against the traditional power conferences over just the past 10 years?  What has the ODAC done during the regular season against power conference teams in the limited number of games that have been played?  How have the ODAC teams done when they have reached the Sweet Sixteen and played teams such as Illinois Wesleyan, William Patterson, John Carroll, Ohio Northern, Wooster, Wittenberg, and UW-Oshkosh?  Thanks for any input you might have that would look at the current state of the ODAC or any other thoughts on the matter.

[Dave 'd-mac' McHugh]

Titan Q, David, Ypsi, and others have said what I was going to post. Simply, you can't be a power conference if the lower half is as weak as the ODAC. Saying the teams at the bottom of the ODAC can compete with Denison and Oberlin proves this point.

The bottom half of the ODAC could not come close to competing against the bottom half of the CCIW, WIAC, or UAA to mention my top three this year. It is an arguement made by many. You can't hook the conference's wagon to only the top teams. If you want to talk about being a power or being a top conference, the conference as a WHOLE has to be good - not just to the top teams.

Not to take anything away from Virginia Wesleyan and Guilford who are very good teams. But just because you have three teams in the tournament doesn't mean your conference is better than one that only has one. The QOWI this season does not reward teams for tougher conference schedules. It is one reason teams in the ODAC and NESCAC got multiple teams in (also thanks to upsets that left the CCIW and WIAC without Pool C teams).

Next year, that changes. With the opponents-opponents record being taken into account, the weakness of a conference will show through. One could argue it might have left Guilford out of the tournament this year - but remember there are other factors besides the QOWI (or whatever they call it next year).

As for Guilford and Virginia Wesleyan... they are very good teams who both have a chance to make it to Salem. I witnessed Guilford last weekend as I broadcast the first two rounds from Johns Hopkins. I was shocked to see Guilford put up 101 points and even more shocked that Manhattanville scored 81. It just didn't feel like a game that would be that high-scoring. But because Guilford so easily broke Manhattanville's pressure defense on every possesion, they were left with wide open shots and hit 50% of them.

Then against Hopkins, Guilford shot even better (over 56%) and showed how disciplined a team they are. Good passing, smart decision making, and good shot selection allowed them to build a lead that the Blue Jays couldn't recover from - as hard as they tried. With Strong inside and Sanborn either playing along side or substituting in for Strong, the team has a very good inside game. And with players like Snipes, Henson, and others outside... they are a dangerous shooting team as well. Honestly, the weakness I saw was in Kimbrough. Yes... he was perfect shooting this weekend... but he tended to make mistakes under pressure... and when Henson took over as point, I saw much better execution of the offense and much better ball protection. (That being said, Kimbrough played a better game against Hopkins than he did against Manhattanville.)

As for Virginia Wesleyan, granted I have not seen this team since last year's championship game, but they haven't lost much. Just the fact they beat Guilford twice this season tells me they can compete against anyone. Sure, games are close... but I never knew VA Wes to blow teams out the last few years with any consistence. They stay in games, do what they need to do to get ahead... and then hit the big shots late to win a game.

All three games this weekend should be great and I look forward to once again visiting VWC as I will be broadcasting the sectionals for NCAASports.com once again!

[tigerfanalso]

Regarding the conversation of how the ODAC compares to other power conferences is interesting. The fact that HSC won the ODAC tourney as a 5 seed supported by the fact two ODAC have advanced to the round of 16; one which lost in the first round of the ODAC tourney and one that lost in the second round supports an argument as to how deep and competitive the ODAC is. I'm not certain the ODAC is a power conference as we speak but if it isn't, it is certainly heading in that direction.

Good luck to VWC and Guilford this weekend. Both teams will be challenged to win but I feel good about one of them making it to the final four. If that happens it would make three of the last five years an ODAC team made the final four. Pretty strong representation and adds fuel to the fire when arguing if the ODAC is in fact a "Power Conference".

[sludge]

Thanks for the write-up, d-mac.  Allow me a couple of appreciative and respectful quibbles.

Guilford was 61% from the floor vs. Manhattanville, not 50%.  That was unusual.

Watching all year, I'd have to say Kimbrough is incredibly valuable.  Perfect shooting in two tournament games is handy, but that's a small part of the story.  His sense of the moment is remarkable.  When we need it most, he's come through big-time, time after time.  I'll take him on my team, anytime.

No quibble on Henson, though.  He's an incredibly well-conditioned athlete who's been a huge impact player for the Quakers this year as a freshman.  Wow!

[allsky7]

BREAKING NEWS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

VWC can not beat Mississippi College.  It does not matter where the game is played.

Go Chocs!! 8)

    Hey t.....since that is the case, I suggest the entire Choctaw team go out and get an early start on the celebrating the night before.   I mean...you know...since they already have it wrapped up and all.  

[sludge]

BREAKING NEWS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

VWC can not beat Mississippi College.  It does not matter where the game is played.

Go Chocs!! 8)

    Hey t.....since that is the case, I suggest the entire Choctaw team go out and get an early start on the celebrating the night before.   I mean...you know...since they already have it wrapped up and all.  

Yes, and I think it would be a good idea for the MC players to talk a bunch of trash to VWC players before the game, to intimidate them. 

[algernon]

Traditionally, year-after-year with occasional interlopers, the consensus seems to be that the WIAC is #1, the CCIW is #2, and a cluster of conferences battle for #3.  Among the latter would be the OAC, the NJAC (though they may have faded a bit recently), and (often) the UAC, the NESCAC, and perhaps one or two others.  The NCAC is probably the most 'split' conference - two perennial top 10 teams (Wittenberg and Wooster, the #1 and #2 all-time winningest schools), but a really dreadful bottom half.

I'd say that the ODAC (usually) is about with the MIAA and MIAC - usually the top 2-3 teams are legitimate top 35 teams (with often a top 5!), but top-to-bottom near the lower end of the top ten conferences.

For what it's worth, these are the games that ODAC teams have played over the past 5 years against teams from the:
    WIAC
    CCIW
    OAC
    UAA
    NJAC
    NESCAC
    NCAC
    HCAC
    MIAA
    MIAC

2002-03:
Otterbein (11-7 in OAC) 82, Roanoke (11-7 in ODAC) 73
Emory & Henry (8-10 in ODAC) 89, Elmhurst (6-8 in CCIW) 78
Randolph-Macon (17-1 in ODAC) 83, Ohio Wesleyan (8-8 in NCAC) 57
UW-Oshkosh (10-6 in WIAC) 53, Randolph-Macon (17-1 in ODAC) 47
Hampden-Sydney (17-1 in ODAC) 98, New Jersey City (8-10 in NJAC) 65
Hampden-Sydney (17-1 in ODAC) 76, Illinois Wesleyan (11-3 in CCIW) 68
Hampden-Sydney (17-1 in ODAC) 68, UW-Oshkosh (10-6 in WIAC) 63
Gustavus Adolphus (15-5 in MIAC) 79, Hampden-Sydney (17-1 in ODAC) 68
Wooster (15-1 in NCAC)78 , Hampden-Sydney (17-1 in ODAC) 74

2003-04:
North Central (5-9 in CCIW) 79, Guilford (11-7 in ODAC) 73
North Central (5-9 in CCIW) 84, Roanoke (6-12 in ODAC) 74
Roanoke (6-12 in ODAC) 82, Earlham (6-12 in NCAC) 60
Randolph-Macon (16-2 in ODAC) 59, Baldwin-Wallace (13-5 in OAC) 50
Randolph-Macon (16-2 in ODAC) 80, John Carroll (14-4 in OAC) 74
Marietta (5-13 in OAC) 85, Emory & Henry (11-7 in ODAC) 79
UW-Stout (8-8 in WIAC) 71, Lynchburg (5-13 in ODAC) 66

2004-05:
Baldwin-Wallace (10-8 in OAC) 79, Hampden-Sydney (11-7 in ODAC) 65
Otterbein (12-6 in OAC) 82, Emory & Henry (7-11 in ODAC) 73
Guilford (9-9 in ODAC) 74, UW-La Crosse (4-12 in WIAC) 57
Guilford (9-9 in ODAC) 85, Case Western (1-13 in UAA) 82
Emory (6-8 in UAA) 73, Lynchburg (8-10 in ODAC) 59
Emory (6-8 in UAA) 90, Washington & Lee (0-18 in ODAC) 77

2005-06:
Randolph-Macon (15-3 in ODAC) 70, Kenyon (4-12 in NCAC) 48
Wooster (15-1 in NCAC) 84, Randolph-Macon (15-3 in ODAC) 70
Virginia Wesleyan (17-1 in ODAC) 81, Illinois Wesleyan (9-5 in CCIW) 79
Virginia Wesleyan (17-1 in ODAC) 59, Wittenberg (13-3 in NCAC) 56
Virginia Wesleyan (17-1 in ODAC) 46, William Paterson (13-5 in NJAC) 35
Heidleberg (5-13 in OAC) 89, Guilford (10-8 in ODAC) 84
Emory (4-10 in UAA) 76, Washington & Lee (4-14 in ODAC) 71
Adrian (3-11 in MIAA) 64, Bridgewater (6-12 in ODAC) 62
John Carroll (8-10 in OAC) 137, Emory & Henry (10-8 in ODAC) 127
Wooster (15-1 in NCAC) 150, Emory & Henry (10-8 in ODAC) 101

2006-07:
Randolph-Macon (9-9 in ODAC) 68, UW Platteville (8-8 in WIAC) 64
Marietta (1-17 in OAC) 85, Bridgewater (6-12 in ODAC) 79
Marietta (1-17 in OAC) 84, Lynchburg (3-15 in ODAC) 68
Olivet (3-11 in MIAA) 72, Bridgewater (6-12 in ODAC) 67
Lynchburg (3-15 in ODAC) 80, Olivet (3-11 in MIAA) 76
Mount Union (5-13 in OAC) 103, Emory & Henry (10-8 in ODAC) 83
Mount Union (5-13 in OAC) 50, Roanoke (11-7 in ODAC) 48
Washington & Lee (6-12 in ODAC) 69, Emory (2-12 in UAA) 57
Ramapo (9-4 in NJAC) 80, Roanoke (11-7 in ODAC) 63
John Carroll (13-5 in OAC) 119, Emory & Henry (10-8 in ODAC) 112

I certainly may have missed a couple.  I'd be interested in anyone's observations.

[David Collinge]

I've made a few corrections of conference affiliation to your list, Algernon, including noting that Rose-Hulman was in the SCAC in 2003-04 and thus not part of your analysis.  This is Rose's first season in the HCAC.