MBB: Midwest Conference

[larry_u]

A few rambling thoughts:

There were some surprising games Friday night.   My pickems were a mess.

I am surprised that Braier was left off the all decade team...not even HM.  Obviously I have not seen all the players and some of them I see listed had more offense, but I have seen enough D3 ball the last 6 years to get a pretty good sense he has been one of the top 20-25 players over the past 10 years in D3.   Becker might also warrant being on the list.  He was significantly better than the kid Daukaus(sp?) from Ill Wes that seems to get a lot of love for reasons I do not understand.




NUT

Have to agree here nut.   Braier got the shaft.  I can't believe that as a Josten's trophy winner as the best player in the country, he doesn't make at least HM.  Thats a major omission in my opnion.  Maybe Pat can clarify how the selection process worked, and how they got to the players that beat Bopper out, but frankly it seems a bit rediculous..

[The Roop]

Rediculous maybe.......... Although that word is a new one on me. Is it ridiculous that Bopper got left off the list ?? No. Was he good ?? Yes. He was very good. He's not All Decade however.

He made the most out of what his ability allowed and that's commendable. He will always be respected for that.  Don't ignore what he has done just because he didn't make an All-Anything Team. He made the LU program what it is. Would you rather have him on the All Decade Team with LU being 4-13 ?? Or leave him off of it and have the program you've got ??

"Welcome. Welcome to the NCAA".......................................

[iwumichigander]

The Josten's Trophy is not awarded to the best player in the country.  A player must be get a nomination signed by the institution's Athletic Director which starts the consideration process. The nominees are narrowed to a list of 10 Finalists from which the winner is voted upon by it's committee.

"This impressive award honors the Division III Men's and Women's Basketball Outstanding Athletes of the Year. Recipients of the Jostens Trophy must exhibit excellence in basketball, academics and community service. -Josten's"

D3Hoops All-Decade team does include 3 Josten's Winners (Year)- Coon (2000), Reich (2003), Nogelo (1998) and includes 4 finalists Panko (1999), Chandler (2003), Crotty (2004) & Kolomodin (2004).  I may have left someone off as I could not pull the list of 2005 finalists.

I agree with The Roop.  Bairer was a very good player who made the most of his considerable abilities and made a good team better.  However, Bairer would not make my all-decade list either.

[Pat Coleman]

We published a list of 25 players out of 225 All-American selections, which were developed from 19,000 Division III basketball starting slots over the past decade (average of 380 schools times five starters times 10 years).

It's a tough list to make.

[LU_nut]

Pat

I understand the difficulty.  I also understand the difference between Jostens and All American.  I believe you put Braier on your third team the year he won the Jostens.  This is all a bit subjective and respect your ability and others to have a different view than I do.     He was not one of the best overall scorers over the decade for certain, but an unbelievable rebounder, defender and assist man made him one of the best 25 in my view.   Of course, my view does not count and should not be viewed as totally unbiased.

[Put up a #]

Hi Pat,

Can you tell us, without too much time on research, how many D3 teams have NEVER PLAYED in the NCAA tourney, and how many have NEVER WON A GAME in the same tournament? I imagine it's a big number.

Thanks

[The Roop]

While Pat works on that.................. I will go out on a limb and say that the teams that have never been in the NCAA tournament have not won any tournament games. Not even in the same tournament.

[Early]

While Pat works on that.................. I will go out on a limb and say that the teams that have never been in the NCAA tournament have not won any tournament games. Not even in the same tournament.

Clap clap clap.  Stand up The Roop and take a bow.


Larry-u,
So I have gotten your karma up to +1.  Are we even?

[systemfan86]

Thanks to the Grinnell folks for their thoughtful responses.  As several others have already pointed out, though, Amherst and Williams have successful athletics even with their vaunted "Top 10" status.  (As a sidenote, I will say that everyone I've met from Grinnell has been friendly and down-to-earth.  I must admit that I can't say the same thing about Williams and a few other schools from the east coast.)  It's not like the rest of the MWC is a bunch of slouches in academics, either.

I also think your selling the athletes at Grinnell short.  Grotberg and others might be "moderately talented", but they're quite talented by MWC standards.  If Arseneault would make a few adjustments to the "system" from year-to-year, he might be able to get more out of his players.

Larry_U made an interesting point, though.  Why doesn't GC's system work in the playoffs?  They're 0 for whatever in the NCAA tournament.  It seems like teams that have never seen the system would be the easiest victims, but it hasn't worked out.  Strange.

Not sure if this applies to Grinnell or not, but I thought I saw a story regarding either Amherst or Williams that discussed the issue of them admitting athletically talented students that normally would have fallen below the academic standards of the schools. This is not to add to the dumb jock stereotype, but rather these students were considered because of their non-academic skills.

Again, I can't speak to whether Grinnell or any other MWC school has done this, but it may be a factor at these other schools.

I know when I was at Grinnell, I was offered the opportunity to participate in multiple varsity sports. While it's been many years since I attended (and Grinnell didn't have great success when I attended), I would hope the opportunity to participate still exists at Grinnell.

I know I'm late to the discussion, but while it would be fun to have success in the NCAA, I don't think it's fair to critique Grinnell on this basis. Yes, Carroll had success last year, but that was largely due to a great run by one player. Other than last year, what success have they had? As for Larry, you could make a similar claim; they had a great run while the Bopper was there, but is that a function of one great player or a great approach? Aside from the Bopper years, what success have they had?

As fan of the conference, I've enjoyed and applauded their success. I don't understand why Grinnell is singled out for critique regarding their post season performance. Does Grinnell get undue attention? Yes. But it's not necessarily different than the attention Princeton used to get for running their throw back style. The attention is because it's unusual; the unusual is interesting. Being like every other team isn't. That's not good or bad, just different.   

[larry_u]

While Pat works on that.................. I will go out on a limb and say that the teams that have never been in the NCAA tournament have not won any tournament games. Not even in the same tournament.

Clap clap clap.  Stand up The Roop and take a bow.


Larry-u,
So I have gotten your karma up to +1.  Are we even?

Wanna go double or nothing on Wednesday night's tilt???

[Greek Tragedy]

While Pat works on that.................. I will go out on a limb and say that the teams that have never been in the NCAA tournament have not won any tournament games. Not even in the same tournament.

If only I gave karma points... lol. 

[Early]

Wanna go double or nothing on Wednesday night's tilt???

Well that doesn't really work, cause I don't even remember how many karma points I gave you, and that doesn't make sense to me cause I'm already in the positives for karma........

......but put me down as a yes!

[Greek Tragedy]

Well that doesn't really work, cause I don't even remember how many karma points I gave you, and that doesn't make sense to me cause I'm already in the positives for karma........

I'm sure your fellow posters could get you back in the negatives. 

[Gregory Sager]

Not sure if this applies to Grinnell or not, but I thought I saw a story regarding either Amherst or Williams that discussed the issue of them admitting athletically talented students that normally would have fallen below the academic standards of the schools. This is not to add to the dumb jock stereotype, but rather these students were considered because of their non-academic skills.

I've never seen such a story. I'm not saying that it isn't true, but unless you can find the source and cite it, it's pure speculation and shouldn't be taken as fact by anyone who reads this room. And, believe me, I am not an Amherst or Williams fan (or a fan of the NESCAC as a whole -- don't get me started on that single round-robin schedule of theirs ). I'm saying this simply in the interest of fairness, because your post could be interpreted as an attempt to impugn the academic standards of Williams and Amherst in order to make Grinnell look better. I'm not saying that that was your intention, but your post could be read that way.

I know when I was at Grinnell, I was offered the opportunity to participate in multiple varsity sports. While it's been many years since I attended (and Grinnell didn't have great success when I attended), I would hope the opportunity to participate still exists at Grinnell.

Amherst and Williams are very much in the vein of the reform movement within D3 that has been dubbed "D4", the high-powered academic schools that would like to downgrade competition by putting further restrictions upon the limits of seasons/off-seasons, imposing recruiting restrictions, etc., while at the same time encouraging a more varied palette of athletic opportunities by creating a high minimum number of sports, in order to make intercollegiate athletic participation more widespread among student bodies rather than strictly segregated to a clique of recruited jocks. Grinnell participates in 18 sports, which seems to be pretty typical for a MWC school. Williams, by contrast, fields teams in 30 sports, and Amherst offers 27.

As fan of the conference, I've enjoyed and applauded their success. I don't understand why Grinnell is singled out for critique regarding their post season performance. Does Grinnell get undue attention? Yes. But it's not necessarily different than the attention Princeton used to get for running their throw back style. The attention is because it's unusual; the unusual is interesting. Being like every other team isn't. That's not good or bad, just different.

I agree. Variety is the spice of life! One of the reasons why college basketball is so much more entertaining than the NBA is that it has less of a cookie-cutter approach. With an exception here or there (e.g., the Tex Winter triangle offense Phil Jackson has used in Chicago and L.A.), NBA teams are just variations on a theme, while college teams really run the gamut both in terms of different offenses and different defenses. Of course, there's a lot more college teams than NBA teams, and a much more varied set of institutional circumstances that invite innovation and diversity (Grinnell and Princeton being two good examples). And there is quite a bit of monkey-see, monkey-do within college circles as well; for example, a lot more teams run motion offenses now than used to be the case. But, by and large, college basketball is still the level where the game has its greatest tactical and strategic creativity.

[systemfan86]

I've never seen such a story. I'm not saying that it isn't true, but unless you can find the source and cite it, it's pure speculation and shouldn't be taken as fact by anyone who reads this room. And, believe me, I am not an Amherst or Williams fan (or a fan of the NESCAC as a whole -- don't get me started on that single round-robin schedule of theirs ). I'm saying this simply in the interest of fairness, because your post could be interpreted as an attempt to impugn the academic standards of Williams and Amherst in order to make Grinnell look better. I'm not saying that that was your intention, but your post could be read that way.

That's a fair challenge/critique. I promise I wouldn't have raised it without considering the context of the information. That said, I'm hard pressed to give the exact source, but I'll make an honest effort.

I believe it was on ESPN on a program like Outside the Lines. It appeared not long after ESPN's College Game Day appeared at the Williams-Amherst football game last fall. The piece regarded a senior on one of the football teams - I believe it was Williams - who was admitted to the school despite being at the bottom end (academically)of the new students admitted. When interviewed the student admitted as much. I believe he came to school as a QB and ended up playing WR for the team. They interviewed him and he discussed the academic struggles he experienced. They also interviewed a member of the faculty who made the charge of lower standards for some athletes. The overall tone of the piece was that the player worked hard to do the academic work and was going to graduate. I'll admit some uncertainty to the school discussed, but it was DIII, in the east and of highly selective nature. I have a sense that they tied the story back to the Williams-Amherst game.

I'm not fond of the intellectual snobbery leveled against athletes on campuses like Grinnell. I heard it there and disliked it then. I wouldn't have repeated it except for the fact that the faculty member of the school profiled raised the issue themselves. When the faculty has those concerns, I believe that they carry a touch more weight. Then again intellectual snobbery against athletes isn't necessarily limited to students, now is it?