MBB: Midwest Conference

[Early]

I bet these suddenly appearing Lake Forest people are just LU fans who changed their screen names. LOL.

At least the LU fans are posting now. lol 

Old School, that's because LU just won their "superbowl" over Ripon for the year.

[LFCBBall07]

So does anyone know what "system" GC will go with this weekend, considering last time they played at LF they played mostly passive zone and the game remained very low scoring.  A very odd game from GC if you ask me.  I know they have fallen back into the 2-3 against LF in the past when the middle was exploited, but I have never seen them do it for such an extended period of time.  And why did SNC fail to break out of the 60s last time they played GC?

[jeffdc]

So does anyone know what "system" GC will go with this weekend, considering last time they played at LF they played mostly passive zone and the game remained very low scoring.  A very odd game from GC if you ask me.  I know they have fallen back into the 2-3 against LF in the past when the middle was exploited, but I have never seen them do it for such an extended period of time.  And why did SNC fail to break out of the 60s last time they played GC?

I don't think I'm giving away any trade secrets for GC if I say the key for this year is 'adaptability'. If the trad system isn't working, they can move to something else. Or they can mix it up if the 3s aren't going down. Based on the LU and CC games, I honestly don't think there's much that any MWC team can throw at them that they can't counter - if their heads are in the game, that is! So in answer to your question, I imagine they'll deal with whatever LFC has to offer. I know the 1 pt loss in the last few seconds of the early season game had to hurt. So I suspect they'll be looking to even that up. 

[diehardfan]

Wow, its great to have Lake Forest people on the board.... welcome guys, and please get thorougly addicted and stay even if your team's season goes sour. Someone remarked to me recently that they hate LFC's old gym, but I personally like the brick and old wood.... I think it's charming. I've seen two MWC conference  games ever, and both were at Lake Forest... and in both instances, they won! Beating a Braier Lawrence that won the conf, and Grinnell. (Yes, I do realize that its ironic that I became high on Lawrence despite having them lose in the only game I've ever seen them play in preson. Anyhow, welcome guys!

[systemfan86]

hmmm, maybe, just maybe, the MWC has a chance at getting a second bid...

According to some numbers posted on the Pool C site, GC is currently 10th in the region based on Pool C QOWI. They are just behind Carthage and not too far behind Wheaton. If GC wins all the way into the MWC Championship game, the leading teams win their respective conferences (Augie in CCIW, Aurora in NATHC, Bluffton in HCAC, etc.) and Wheaton/Carthage/Manchester get tripped up in the next couple games, there might be a way for GC to move up enough to get a Pool C if they lost in the championship game.

Honestly, too many things would have to fall into place that I wouldn't want to come to that. In a relatively weak year for the conference, I'd rather have one team show some strength and get the A bid. Not to mention, I'd like to see GC win out!

Oops, Manchester might not be an issue. They are 14-7 overall, but 6-6 in their conference. The pool C page has them 7th in the region. 

[Maverick]

A future Monmouth basketball/football player...

http://www.pantagraph.com/articles/2007/02/09/sports/doc45cbf1e7357b0345807308.txt

Titan Q - Nice link/story you posted there.  It's great to see a future Fighting Scot having success like Tanney is.  Can't wait to see what he can do once he's a full-time Scot!

[Greek Tragedy]

I always like coming on d3hoops and having "a lot of things to catch up on."  Fun stuff.  OK, I'll start from where I left off...

I'm not really sure where your argument is in this post, I've read it several times, and in my opinion, it makes NO SENSE! lol. 

Old school you summed up my point exactly. The MIAC plays 25 games.  The MWC plays 23.

First off, yes, the MIAC plays 25 games and the MWC plays 23.  But, they would both play the same amount of nonconference games, 5. 

If you take away  two non conference games to play conference games you also take away the chance for the second place team or the conference champion that gets knocked off in the conference tournament to get the possible two extra in region wins that could make them an at large bid.

This makes no sense.  Conference games are already in-region.  What's the difference if you win two conference games than if you win two nonconference games, that are both in-region?

With the scenario like it is now it makes every regular season conference game count that much more.  you don't necessarily need the two extra conference wins to get the at large.  if lawrence in years past would have gone 14-4 in conference, won the conference, lost in the conference tournament, and go 1-4 in non conference would they have still made the tournament at 15-9? with the loss in the conference tournament added. or do they have a better chance with more non conference games where they can schedule possibly better teams than the lower level teams in conference that they can beat and get a better shot at an at large?

Again, I don't understand your reasoning here.  Whether you play an unbalanced schedule like the MWC, a balanced double-round robin like the WIAC or a "once through" like the NESCAC, all conference games matter.  It sounds like you are trying to tell me that going 20-3 overall and 13-3 in conference is more important than going 20-3 overall and 15-3 in conference (you don't need those extra two conference games)?

I think the short answer is they have a better chance with more non-conf games against better teams than lower level teams in conference.

For every LU team that plays the "lower level teams in conference," twice (and presumably hurts their QOWI), there are those teams that play the LUs of the world twice.  It goes both ways.  This whole "play everyone twice" argument came up when a LU poster said that it was too bad they only played the bottom feeders once....thus, hurting their chances of winning the "winnable" games and they end up playing the contenders twice and losing.  If your record is 20-5 when all is said and done, it doesn't matter if you play 5 nonconference games or 7 nonconference games.  Winning a game against a lower-level team in the conference is always better than losing to a better nonconference team.  You get more points regarding the QOWI if you beat an 0-16 team than if you lose to a 16-0 team, last time I checked.

I think the MWC has one win against a top 25 team this year and that came early in the year when Carroll beat a still ranked Larry team.

You can't count that since it's a conference game and that would defeat the argument of playing nonconference games!    Besides, Carroll just played Lawrence two weeks ago.  I was there. lol.

You have to post wins against teams with high winning percentage to get your QOWI value up; this value is important in getting the Pool C bids that would go to the second team from the league. The relative parity of the league this years also works against a second bid. For example, GC's loss to Norbs hurt their QOWI; they also needed to win another one or two games of their non-conference schedule.

You make good points here, but actually, you just have to win your games...whether against teams with high winning %s or not.  Look at Aurora.  They are 18-2 and the NathCon as a conference is horrible.  But, their QOWI is 23rd best at 10.25.

Systemfan86 hit the nail right on the head.  A couple of years ago, what on paper was the best Grinnell team possibly ever had a great year, set a record for points per game, won the regular season by a landslide, and then lost in the MWC championship game at the Old Darby.  No bid to the tourney. 

I think it goes with the territory of being the small conference in a sea of quality conferences (WIAC, Iowa Conference, etc).  Most people aren't looking at the upcoming Ripon/Carroll game with much national DIII interest even though it means a lot to everyone in the MWC.  Why?  Because who cares about Ripon or Carroll anyway?  I know I don't.

Actually, he doesn't hit it on the head and it has nothing to do with "reputation" of the power leagues.  The NCAA looks at numbers only.  This isn't D1 where the "power conferences" get 5-6-7 teams in the big dance.  The season was 2002-2003 and Grinnell went 19-6 (13-3 in conference).  6 losses is too many, especially back then prior to expanding the tourney (and more importantly in this argument, the Pool C)  I don't remember the exact number, but prior to last year, I think there were only 6 or 7 Pool C bids to be handed out.

hmmm, maybe, just maybe, the MWC has a chance at getting a second bid...

According to some numbers posted on the Pool C site, GC is currently 10th in the region based on Pool C QOWI. They are just behind Carthage and not too far behind Wheaton. If GC wins all the way into the MWC Championship game, the leading teams win their respective conferences (Augie in CCIW, Aurora in NATHC, Bluffton in HCAC, etc.) and Wheaton/Carthage/Manchester get tripped up in the next couple games, there might be a way for GC to move up enough to get a Pool C if they lost in the championship game.

I don't know if you are familiar with the Pool C selection process and I don't want to insult your intelligence.  This is kind of how the system works.  There are 8 regions.  At the start of the Pool C selection process, the top team in each region gets a "seat" at the Pool C table.  Once the NCAA picks a Pool C team, the next team in THAT region gets to sit down.  So, what would need to happen...for argument's sake, if they ended up 5th in the Midwest Region after the AQs are handed out, is that all four teams ahead of Grinnell in the region would need to be selected before Grinnell even gets to "sit down".  And then they would face the "resumes" of the other 7 teams in their respective regions.

Wow, that was way too long.  I apologize!  Personally, I don't think any team in the MWC has a shot this year at a Pool C bid.

I'm sure if I got anything wrong, Sager will correct me on it!

[titan2000]

Systemfan86 hit the nail right on the head.  A couple of years ago, what on paper was the best Grinnell team possibly ever had a great year, set a record for points per game, won the regular season by a landslide, and then lost in the MWC championship game at the Old Darby.  No bid to the tourney. 

I think it goes with the territory of being the small conference in a sea of quality conferences (WIAC, Iowa Conference, etc).  Most people aren't looking at the upcoming Ripon/Carroll game with much national DIII interest even though it means a lot to everyone in the MWC.  Why?  Because who cares about Ripon or Carroll anyway?  I know I don't. 

That reminds me of a thought I had the other day: I believe that people from Wisconsin only consume bratwurst and cheese.  My only memory of Wisconsin is looking into the stands during both basketball and baseball contests and observing a host of overweight induhviduals in the stands eating brats and cheese.  One guy from Ripon once asked my friend while warming up for a basketball game if his toupee was slipping off, I wanted to ask him how he managed to purchase clothing with its own delicatessen in its pockets.  I think even the Munchiner Leute would be amazed anyone could even find that much pork sausage.  It's all imported from Iowa anyway.  We send it to you so that you'll be fat and not be able to keep up with the System!
[/quot

  I'd give you some negative karma, God knows you'll get a lot making comments like that.  Of course the folks in Grinnell are all trim and svelte.  I live in Florida about 3 months a year and there are plenty of fat people there too.  I went to Starbucks in Naples yesterday and a number of wide bodies were ordering the double mocha with cream--WTF?  They should know that the Roopacino is the only calorie free fufu coffee drink, because its made with love.

[The Roop]

I suppose if anyone is capable of getting to the point in one sentence they will.

[Greek Tragedy]

I suppose if anyone is capable of getting to the point in one sentence they will.

Fat chance! lol 

Oh wait, that was one sentence!

[systemfan86]

I don't know if you are familiar with the Pool C selection process and I don't want to insult your intelligence.  This is kind of how the system works.  There are 8 regions.  At the start of the Pool C selection process, the top team in each region gets a "seat" at the Pool C table.  Once the NCAA picks a Pool C team, the next team in THAT region gets to sit down.  So, what would need to happen...for argument's sake, if they ended up 5th in the Midwest Region after the AQs are handed out, is that all four teams ahead of Grinnell in the region would need to be selected before Grinnell even gets to "sit down".  And then they would face the "resumes" of the other 7 teams in their respective regions.

Actually, I keep thinking I understand the Pool C and everytime I think I have it, I don't. That is actually one of the better explanations.

I think I allowed for some of what you are saying by indicating that the A bids would go to teams ahead of GC in the 'standings' and then they'd have to pass two or three other teams (Wheaton and Carthage). What I couldn't determine was the status of a team that had a better QOWI but a lousy league record.

I was presuming the following from the Midwest:
      1) Wash U (Pool A - UAA)
      2) Augie (Pool A - CCIW)
      3) Chicago (Pool C, 17th national)
      4) Aurora (Pool A - NATHC)
      5) Bluffton (Pool A - HCAC)
      6) Elmhurst (Pool C, 55 national)
      7) Manchester (? ? ? ?, 63rd national, but 11-7 in region and 6-6 in conference
      8 ) Wheaton (need them to stumble before conf tourney)
      9) Carthage (need them to stumble before conf tourney)
     10) GC (75th national)

I think with a stumble, GC could possibly pass Wheaton and Carthage. They won't pass Chicago or Elmhurst, so I think they could (with a great deal of luck) be third or fourth at the table for the Midwest. 

Manchester is a big question mark to me. They are currently 7th (of 9 teams) in the HCAC with a 6-6 conference mark. I have a hard time understanding how they could get to sit at the Pool C table before a team that won their regular season conference title; I'm not saying they wouldn't, but it would seem to demonstrate a huge flaw in the system if they were blocking the Midwest's seat at the table.

[Greek Tragedy]

I think I allowed for some of what you are saying by indicating that the A bids would go to teams ahead of GC in the 'standings' and then they'd have to pass two or three other teams (Wheaton and Carthage). What I couldn't determine was the status of a team that had a better QOWI but a lousy league record.

Conference record doesn't mean anything...it's IN-REGION RECORD. 

Many posters don't know this, but this SITE is a great INFORMATIONAL site, not just a place to talk trash! lol.  I know a lot of posters just skip the other sources on this site and go straight to the Posting Up section.  But, if this is what you do, there is still a lot of info to learn by simply going to other areas of the Posting Up links, like going to the multi-regional page, and then looking up the Pool C board, the QOWI board, and other stuff like that. 

Try it sometime. 

BTW, here is the link to the 2007 Division III Basketball Championship Handbook

Starting on page 13 is the selection process of the NCAA tourney.  You can even figure out your own up-to-date QOWI!!  Fun stuff! lol

[The Roop]

4) Aurora (Pool A - NATHC)

No no no.............. Since it's a new conference they aren't guaranteed a bid until 2009. That makes them a Pool B.

[systemfan86]

I think I allowed for some of what you are saying by indicating that the A bids would go to teams ahead of GC in the 'standings' and then they'd have to pass two or three other teams (Wheaton and Carthage). What I couldn't determine was the status of a team that had a better QOWI but a lousy league record.

Conference record doesn't mean anything...it's IN-REGION RECORD. 

Many posters don't know this, but this SITE is a great INFORMATIONAL site, not just a place to talk trash! lol.  I know a lot of posters just skip the other sources on this site and go straight to the Posting Up section.  But, if this is what you do, there is still a lot of info to learn by simply going to other areas of the Posting Up links, like going to the multi-regional page, and then looking up the Pool C board, the QOWI board, and other stuff like that. 

Try it sometime. 

BTW, here is the link to the 2007 Division III Basketball Championship Handbook

Starting on page 13 is the selection process of the NCAA tourney.  You can even figure out your own up-to-date QOWI!!  Fun stuff! lol

Nice tone, OS. 
I complement you on the explanation and then get slapped down as ignorant? Very nice.
My abject apologies if this irritates you so badly that you need to be a jerk about it.

Exactly where do you think I was getting all this info that I posted? Out of my a$$?! I found it on the Pool C board and the QOWI board. I used the site to identify Manchester's record as well as it's position in it's conference.

LET ME CLARIFY MY POSITION.

I agree that it is unlikely that the MWC is going to get a Pool C bid. As a GC fan, I'm hoping that they win the conference and get the Pool A. If they do, then I don't think there is anyway that another MWC team is going to get a Pool C. Why? Because I looked at the data on the other parts of this site and saw that LFC has the next best QOWI in the region, and there is no way that they could pass enough teams in the region to get consideration.

If, however, GC were to win out except for the final game, I've estimated that their QOWI would end up around 9.25, slightly higher than it is now. Because they are neck-and-neck with Carthage in QOWI, an unexpected loss by Carthage could jump GC into 9th in the region. Wheaton is also close and an unexpected loss might(!) allow GC to pass them to 8th in the region. Take out the Pool A teams ahead of them and the Pool B team, and you have Wash U or Chicago - they get a C - Elmhurst - who should get a C and Manchester all ahead of GC.

I KNOW that conference records doesn't matter. But I think most casual observers might agree that somethings amiss in the process if a team that ends up 7th in a 9 team conference jumps into consideration for the NCAA tournament ahead of the teams that finished above of them in the conference and ahead of a team that won their regular season conference. I understand it could happen and likely will happen, but reasonable people can raise it as an example of how the selection process may be flawed. 

[The Roop]

Wow. Cat fight. RAAARRRRRRRRR.

Be at peace citizens. "The Roop" can make the trip to Grinnell for the MWC Tournament as direct deposit kicked in and I can now take a payday Friday off. As always waffles are still banned at Saints Rest but "The Roop" will pick up the tab for any and all *Roopacinnos purchased that weekend.

*Jeffs spelling not mine