MBB: College Conference of Illinois and Wisconsin

[mwunder]

As for the no call at the other end of the floor, you might want to watch it again without the green tinted glasses.  The only possible call on that play was a block.  Jordan was never set in front of Kelly.

On both of the calls involving Jordan Nelson guarding Malcom Kelly, Carthage broadcaster John Weiser said felt like Kelly probably got away with an offensive foul (if I recall the broadcast correctly, he mentioned Kelly potentially lowering the shoulder on both).   

As I recall both plays, Jordan Nelson was set in a defensive position, Kelly turned, and Nelson went down.  So it just came down to whether Nelson flopped, or if Kelly lowered the shoulder and initiated the contact.  (Both were extremely similar to that play at the end of the Elmhurst game, when Kelly scored a basket...also no call in that situation.)  The official must have determine in both situations that Nelson flopped as neither was called an offensive foul.

To say "the only possible call on that play was a block" is much too strong in my opinion, mwunder.  Again, John Weiser thought Carthage probably got a break on both.  Those absolutely could have been called either way.

And let me stress, I don't think either call determined the result of the game.  Carthage played a lot better than IWU and deserved to win.

To quote another 70's song..."there's only you and me and we just disagree".  I was 5 rows up in the bleachers right behind that call.  I don't care what John Weiser or anyone else thought.  In my opinion, Jordan was still moving his feet when Kelly started his move.  If he, (Jordan) isn't moving to within 6 inches of Kelly, he may have had some room to complain, but in this case, Jordan is still moving into his defensive position when Kelly makes his move.  IWU got in the faces of Carthage guards in the second half, and that's what happened here, but Jordan was not set on this particular play.

But, in hindsight, if someone else, who was there, saw the play differently, I guess there is room for the call to go the other way.  I retract my previous statement.  That being said, in my opinion, it was not a charge, nor should it have been called one.

[carthage guy]

bad calls effect all teams Im still smarting over the elmhurst calls that to me were completely awful.

[toooldtohoop]

I would be interested in hearing from someone in the know about "charging".  Does the defender need to be planted?

I have seen a number of charging calls this year where the ball handler initiated contact against the chest of a defender who was moving backward, but not sideways.  The offensive player clearly initiates the contact and drives the defender back, even though the defender was "moving".  I would say that a number of these calls involved a lowered shoulder. 

seems like the calls were made more because the contact was centered vs on the side, as opposed to contact into a stationary defender.

[Naperick]

bad calls effect all teams Im still smarting over the elmhurst calls that to me were completely awful.

The 2nd half was poorly officiated in the ELM-CC game.  The call that really upset Bosko was a bad call.  Hard to believe that was missed.

Should be an exciting 2nd half of the CCIW season!

[A Lover of the Game]

I would be interested in hearing from someone in the know about "charging".  Does the defender need to be planted?

I have seen a number of charging calls this year where the ball handler initiated contact against the chest of a defender who was moving backward, but not sideways.  The offensive player clearly initiates the contact and drives the defender back, even though the defender was "moving".  I would say that a number of these calls involved a lowered shoulder. 

seems like the calls were made more because the contact was centered vs on the side, as opposed to contact into a stationary defender.

Here is a link to the NCAA website regarding the new block/charge rule;
http://www.ncaa.org/about/resources/media-center/news/prop-approves-rules-changes-men%E2%80%99s-and-women%E2%80%99s-basketball

[AndOne]

As for the no call at the other end of the floor, you might want to watch it again without the green tinted glasses.  The only possible call on that play was a block.  Jordan was never set in front of Kelly.

On both of the calls involving Jordan Nelson guarding Malcom Kelly, Carthage broadcaster John Weiser said felt like Kelly probably got away with an offensive foul (if I recall the broadcast correctly, he mentioned Kelly potentially lowering the shoulder on both).   

As I recall both plays, Jordan Nelson was set in a defensive position, Kelly turned, and Nelson went down.  So it just came down to whether Nelson flopped, or if Kelly lowered the shoulder and initiated the contact.  (Both were extremely similar to that play at the end of the Elmhurst game, when Kelly scored a basket...also no call in that situation.)  The official must have determine in both situations that Nelson flopped as neither was called an offensive foul.

To say "the only possible call on that play was a block" is much too strong in my opinion, mwunder.  Again, John Weiser thought Carthage probably got a break on both.  Those absolutely could have been called either way.

And let me stress, I don't think either call determined the result of the game.  Carthage played a lot better than IWU and deserved to win.

To quote another 70's song..."there's only you and me and we just disagreed".  I was 5 rows up in the bleachers right behind that call.  I don't care what John Weiser or anyone else thought.  In my opinion, Jordan was still moving his feet when Kelly started his move.  If he, (Jordan) isn't moving to within 6 inches of Kelly, he may have had some room to complain, but in this case, Jordan is still moving into his defensive position when Kelly makes his move.  IWU got in the faces of Carthage guards in the second half, and that's what happened here, but Jordan was not set on this particular play.

But, in hindsight, if someone else, who was there, saw the play differently, I guess there is room for the call to go the other way.  I retract my previous statement.  That being said, in my opinion, it was not a charge, nor should it have been called one.

AndOne
All-America
Date Registered: July 01, 2006, 09:58:27 pm

Signature:

There ain't no good guys, there ain't no bad guys-----there's only you and me, and we just disagree.    :-)  (Dave Mason)

As I've been saying for years! 

[AndOne]

bad calls effect all teams Im still smarting over the elmhurst calls that to me were completely awful.

The 2nd half was poorly officiated in the ELM-CC game.  The call that really upset Bosko was a bad call.  Hard to believe that was missed.

Should be an exciting 2nd half of the CCIW season!

I've been watching CCIW games on a regular basis since the 2004-05 season. Many of the refs that were officiating games that season are still around today, and many of them are still calling games the way they did in 04-05 despite whatever rules changes the NCAA has instituted since that time. They may initially change their officiating modus operandi for a while when a new rule comes on the books, but I believe most revert to their historical ways within a fairly short time. I've seen it time and time again this season with regard to the new set of rules that went into effect this year concerning a defender's impeding the ball handler. In the beginning of the season, a foul was whistled if you dared breathe to heavily on the guy with the ball. Now, the vast majority of refs are allowing much more contact prior to blowing the whistle. Thats fine with me because my humble opinion is that basketball IS a contact sport and a certain amount of contact should be allowed. The point is the NCAA can make all the rule changes they want, good or bad, but its up to the refs to enforce the rules and each one seems to have a little different view of what is permissible and what isn't despite what the "official" rule states.

To me the real problem with CCIW officiating is some of the refs are so old they A) could never change the way they officiate because they've been doing it a certain way for 30 years, and B) can't keep up with the speed of the game, frequently trailing the play so its impossible for them to be in position to make the right call. This pattern isn't going to change until the conference retires some of these guys and brings in some new, younger talent. In addition to all the CCIW games I see, I usually go to high school games most Tuesdays and Fridays. In those games I see lots of terrible refs that you wouldn't want to see doing college games where the players are generally bigger, stronger, and  faster. However, I also see a number of refs who are equal to or better than many of the refs who have been making and blowing the same calls in college games for years. If the CCIW wants better officiating, its only going to happen if they bring in some of these younger officials who are both in better shape, and more up to date and secure with the rules and how to interpret them. If the same refs who have been around for 20, 30, and maybe even more years are kept around, nobody should expect a change in how games are called. I'm not saying all the current refs are bad, but several are, and the games would likely be more enjoyable if they were replaced.   

[John Gleich]

Augustana    5-2
Carthage      5-2
Ill. Wes.        5-2
Wheaton      5-2


Does 10-4 earn you a piece of the CCIW Championship?

I don't think so.  I'm pretty confident it will take 11-3.

I agree with Bob. You have to go all the way back to Millikin's 1982-83 title to find a CCIW champion that had four conference losses. While it's entirely possible that someone could run the table in the second round-robin and finish 12-2, I believe that 11-3 will win the league.

I think the key here may actually be Elmhurst (well, Elmhurst and the other 3 of the bottom 4, but Elmhurst is only 1 game back and just knocked off one of the teams tied for the conference lead, so probably only Elmhurst).

This was the only "loss by the top 4 vs the bottom 4" in the first half... right?

Wait, no, Elmhurst vs. Carthage from Wednesday.

So maybe now it would be better to talk about the top 5 and the bottom 3...? Because Elmhurst's 3 losses were to Wheaton, IWU, and North Central... so ya only have to deal with one "bottom beats top?"

[carthage guy]

I kinda agree with John Gleich on the bottom 4 top 4 theory.

Elmhurst now has only 1 lost to the bottom 3??? So we are talking about 1 game of separation between these teams for the conference tournament.  They may be a factor yet for the conference tourney next month.

It seems like all of the 5-2 teams have had competitive games with millikin, npu and ncu so those road games could especially be a factor.

If i had to pick today

IWU 11-3
Carthage 10-4
Wheaton 9-5
Augie 9-5
Elmhurst 7-7

[augiefan]

IWU will finish no worse than 11-3. Only the road game at Wheaton game looks like a challenge for the Titans at this point. The rest of us are in trouble, when it comes to winning the regular season title. It still looks like Augie, Carthage and Wheaton for the remaining conference tourney spots, but Elmhurst completely thrashed Augie Saturday evening and is now a serious factor.

[veterancciwfan]

Just a reminder of how tough this league is: At IWU, NCC shot .537 from the field and .573 on 3s and had a legitimate chance to win (IWU won by 15 with a run late in the game around the 7 minute mark) and had a very good chance to beat the #1 D3 team in the country on New Year's Eve in a great game I witnessed. And NCC, though not great, is at least an above average D3 team. Yet they find themselves in 6th place with practically no chance to make the CCIW tournament. Regarding WSP: Tillema is probably the best D3 player in the country and Trevor Hass is probably in the top 10. All he did Saturday was score 45, going 9/13 on 3s and 4/4 on 2-point shots. I don't care who they played. Most players couldn't make 9 of 13 3s in pre-game warmups.
Regarding Carthage: Why does Kastel start? I thought Van Wyk, the 6'6" junior from the Netherlands, showed some offensive potential. Maybe he just had an above average performance on Saturday.

[Mr. Ypsi]

^^  Re: Tillema and Hass.  I'd agree about Hass, but suspect Tillema will be beaten out by Cabrini's Aaron Walton-Moss for national POY (Amherst's Aaron Toomey will also be in the conversation).  If memory serves, Tillema, Toomey, and Walton-Moss are all guards, so first team AA should be a real battle!  (My hunch is that Pat, et. al., will call one a wing and put all three on the team.)

(Noting, of course, that there is still a lot of season and tournament yet to be played!)

[Naperick]

I kinda agree with John Gleich on the bottom 4 top 4 theory.

Elmhurst now has only 1 lost to the bottom 3??? So we are talking about 1 game of separation between these teams for the conference tournament.  They may be a factor yet for the conference tourney next month.

It seems like all of the 5-2 teams have had competitive games with millikin, npu and ncu so those road games could especially be a factor.

If i had to pick today

IWU 11-3
Carthage 10-4
Wheaton 9-5
Augie 9-5
Elmhurst 7-7

I'll admit that I am getting excited about Elmhurst's chances of making the CCIW tourney.  That was quite a week for the 'Jays.  It's been over 48 hours since the win over Augie and I have had time to calm down and think rationally.  Elmhurst still has a difficult schedule and will probably need help.  They still travel to Bloomington, Kenosha, and Rock Island.  The trip to Decatur won't be easy, either.  They also host NCC, a team that beat them 9 days ago at Merner.  They also host North Park.  I know there are still many games to play but the game at R.A. Faganal on Wednesday against the Thunder is very crucial to the Bluejays chances.  A win puts them in the mix.  A loss means they have to steal a road game or two at IWU, Augie, or Carthage and that will not be easy.  It will take a minimum of 8 CCIW wins to make the conference tourney and then tie breakers are likely to be in the mix for that 4th spot.  I agree with Carthage guy that 9 wins is probably the amount of wins needed to get a CCIW tourney invite.  Can Elmhurst squeeze out a 5-2 2nd half?  If they do, they will certainly have earned it.

[Naperick]

Speaking of the CCIW tourney and I know that is still 4 weeks away, can you imagine how tough Carthage will be if they make it?  I think their style of play with the athletes they have make them a strong candidate to win 2 games in around 24 hours.  I'm not trying to take anything away from any of the other teams in the conference.  I just think they will be a hard team to beat. 

That team is fun to watch!

[iwu70]

Would love to see Elmhurst in the mix for the CCIW tournament.  Sure would be a major achievement for John Baines, surpassing expectations for his team in his first year of head coaching in the CCIW.  For them to beat Augie that way, he must have his players really believing.  Agree with Naperick that CC will be a tough out along the way, too, esp. if they shoot the percentage they shot vs. IWU in Kenosha last Saturday.   

IWU70