MBB: NESCAC

[golflax99]

Agree with Old guy. The combination of Harris and Smith last season made this team so deadly. The threat of Harris on the perimeter is something that is very hard to replace. Harris had one of the purest shots (lefty mind you) I've ever seen.

Midd has been taking the same exact amount of threes per game as last season (22), but they are only shooting 26 % ! Last season they were over 39 %

This year Midd is struggling to find out who that go to guy on the perimeter is. I feel as if they will settle in and either Dudley or Coghlan will turn into that guy.

Smith should return very soon if not today coming off his bruised elbow.

[Hugenerd]

Tufts dropped a close game to MIT today.  Pierce is a really good post player, and seemed like he could have dominated there with MITs lack of size, but Tufts didnt really look for that.  MIT ended up hitting a few timely 3s around the 5 minute mark of the second half to open up an 8 point lead and then held on by making their FTs.

If anyone else was there, let me know if you agree with me, but I though the biggest play of the game was at the end of the first half.  That was when Pierce and Bartolotta collided at half court when Bartolotta was trying to take a charge.  Bartolotta was called for the foul but Pierce seemed to kind of go after Bartolotta, which didnt result in any technicals, but I thought the game was called much closer in the second half after that.  MIT had two players foul out and had a third that was injured in the first half, meaning they only had 6 players in uniform at the end of the game.  Near the end of the half, Pierce was called for an intentionally when he ran into a guys back on a breakaway, in a play I think he didnt have much of a chance of contesting cleanly, which sent the MIT player flying into the hoop's supports.  After that he complained consistently and when he didnt get a call on a three in the last minute he was hit with another technical (which was also his 5th foul).

From there, MIT did a good job of getting the ball to Bartolotta when Tufts had to foul and he made pretty much every FT down the stretch.

[duffer]

Pretty typical Jon Pierce. If his shots aren't falling, he has been known to turn nasty. Was not there tonight, but have seen enough games to recognize the symptoms & the behavior. Unfortunately, he then loses his focus and it can be costly to his team.

[dman]

NESCAC is definitely struggling (as predicted, given an amazing class of 2008 and a class of 2009 with relatively few stars): I don't recall a collective out-of-conference record as mediocre in any recent season.  Lots of frosh making an impact already, and lots of new coaches, so some teams may just need a little time to gell / adjust.  Also a few early season injuries have really hurt some teams, in particular Smith and Geoghegan. 

This is interesting: Wesleyan apparently nabbed a very high-level recruit from Mass according to this site:

http://www.newenglandrecruitingreport.com/prospects/


Beresford ranks higher on that site, I believe, than any NESCAC recruit from New England last year ... looks like Reilly is off to a good start.  I imagine he'll bring in a ton of talent next year, with the promise of plenty of immediate playing time, and a chance to turn the program around. 

from the same source, it appears babson and hamilton are also landing players in the top 110 in ne......

[lefrakenstein]

Colby smothers a pretty good Babson team tonight, holding them to 47 points on less that 35% shooting. Choice had 28 points.

[Hugenerd]

NESCAC is definitely struggling (as predicted, given an amazing class of 2008 and a class of 2009 with relatively few stars): I don't recall a collective out-of-conference record as mediocre in any recent season.  Lots of frosh making an impact already, and lots of new coaches, so some teams may just need a little time to gell / adjust.  Also a few early season injuries have really hurt some teams, in particular Smith and Geoghegan. 

This is interesting: Wesleyan apparently nabbed a very high-level recruit from Mass according to this site:

http://www.newenglandrecruitingreport.com/prospects/


Beresford ranks higher on that site, I believe, than any NESCAC recruit from New England last year ... looks like Reilly is off to a good start.  I imagine he'll bring in a ton of talent next year, with the promise of plenty of immediate playing time, and a chance to turn the program around. 

from the same source, it appears babson and hamilton are also landing players in the top 110 in ne......

Does anyone know how reliable the rankings are from that site?  Just looking at a few player's rankings, I notice some trends that dont really make sense to me.  For example, there is a player committed to Babson who is ranked 51 in NE and 30 in MA, but then there are players who are ranked close to 300 in NE and are going to Big East schools.  Not to take anything away from Babson or any other school that has landed good recruits, but either the NEWMAC and NESCAC schools all of a sudden have some new competitive advantage or these rankings arent very accurate.  I mean, it would be one thing if these players were going d3 over bottom of the barrel d1's, but when you have players who are going d3 that are ranked hundreds of spots ahead of big east players, it makes you question the rankings.  I trust the big east recruiters more than I do the person(s) who put those rankings together, although it does provide for interesting conversation.

[senatorfrost]

  I have seen one of the players that is on the list and is rated very high in New England. When I say very high I mean top forty. I was not overly impressed. Of course players can get better but when I saw this player I thought 2-4th best recruit at a NESCAC school depending.

[TheHerst2and4]

Does anyone know how reliable the rankings are from that site? 

I've seen or coached against a bunch of players on those lists, those rankings are not very accurate nor do they hold much weight. However, as the senator said players can get better

[Old Guy]

I was sitting at a Middlebury game this past week with a friend and I said to him that I thought that home-court advantage in NESCAC was a greater factor than in other conferences, for a variety of reasons (including distance and mode of travel, especially for some teams), but mostly because of the academic rigor in NESCAC and the absence of concessions for athletes given the demands of their travel.

At Middlebury, absences for contests are not "excused;" they are "explained." Look on a NESCAC team's bus and you'll see faces buried in books. If an athlete has a big paper due, or an exam on the day of a contest, he expends the all-nighter, just like everyone else. I'm not saying other schools and conferences lack rigor – I'm arguing scale.

My friend replied: "pure snobbery."

Is he right, or do I have a point? Home games confer an obvious advantage everywhere, but a little more so in NESCAC?

[eclinchy]

Like most everyone else you'll encounter on this board, I am more than a little biased.

But yes, I think you have a point.

[met_fan]

Like most everyone else you'll encounter on this board, I am more than a little biased.

But yes, I think you have a point.

I think that there are plenty of schools out there where the requirements are below what the NESCAC requires, but at the same time, it's not as though Amherst or Middlebury are the only schools that force their student-athletes to do their work.  I realize that is over-simplifying things a bit, but I think you get my point.  I'm guessing that Rochester, Vassar, RPI, Chicago, Washington, etc. are fairly stringent in their student-athlete requirements.  Then again, if you are comparing NESCAC to Westfield St. or Brockport St., then you probably have a point.  However, generally the kids going to NESCAC schools already have a whole set of advantages under their belt that many kids lack, which should help them overcome their "disadvantages."

[Hugenerd]

Like most everyone else you'll encounter on this board, I am more than a little biased.

But yes, I think you have a point.

I think that there are plenty of schools out there where the requirements are below what the NESCAC requires, but at the same time, it's not as though Amherst or Middlebury are the only schools that force their student-athletes to do their work.  I realize that is over-simplifying things a bit, but I think you get my point.  I'm guessing that Rochester, Vassar, RPI, Chicago, Washington, etc. are fairly stringent in their student-athlete requirements.  Then again, if you are comparing NESCAC to Westfield St. or Brockport St., then you probably have a point.  However, generally the kids going to NESCAC schools already have a whole set of advantages under their belt that many kids lack, which should help them overcome their "disadvantages."

I know you named a couple of schools, but if you are generalizing for the entire NESCAC, you should also point out that the entire UAA is comprised of very academically rigorous schools.  Then there are MIT and Caltech, which are the most academically rigorous schools in D3 (MIT is the only school ranked in the top 5 overall that is d3, they are also #1 in engineering, Caltech is ranked 6 overall by US News).

[ne-ball]

when schools (colleges) have tough academic standards, most of the student athletes who go there were student athletes in high school and know how to manage their time. i think that saying schoolwork contributes to home court advantage is a subtle point. i don't see it as a real factor. the home court crowd and energy is the game changer, and the players pride in their school and program.
also, there is haverford, hopkins and swarthmore in the centennial.

[Gabriel]

I was sitting at a Middlebury game this past week with a friend and I said to him that I thought that home-court advantage in NESCAC was a greater factor than in other conferences, for a variety of reasons (including distance and mode of travel, especially for some teams), but mostly because of the academic rigor in NESCAC and the absence of concessions for athletes given the demands of their travel.

At Middlebury, absences for contests are not "excused;" they are "explained." Look on a NESCAC team's bus and you'll see faces buried in books. If an athlete has a big paper due, or an exam on the day of a contest, he expends the all-nighter, just like everyone else. I'm not saying
other schools and conferences lack rigor – I'm arguing scale.

My friend replied: "pure snobbery."

Is he right, or do I have a point? Home games confer an obvious advantage everywhere, but a little more so in NESCAC?

There are other conferences with academic pressures similar to NESCAC. 
The Centennial Conference is an example.   Schools like Haverford, Swarthmore, Johns Hopkins, Ursinus, Franklin & Marshall,  Muhlenberg, Dickinson, Gettysburg etc are not exactly chopped liver.

[ac08]

Obviously, assignments can be due on any day but I'd think that the "workload" factor of an away 'CAC game is neutralized pretty well because they occur on the front side of a weekend.


I haven't looked at the rankings in a couple of years, but it looks like a bunch of 'CAC schools moved up on the list . Good job, 'CAC
http://colleges.usnews.rankingsandreviews.com/college/liberal-arts-search