MBB: College Conference of Illinois and Wisconsin

[Gregory Sager]

No, that's not what I'm saying at all, kiko. I'm saying that the analogy breaks down because the scheduling matrices with regard to the two respective leagues are so totally different.

[kiko]

No, that's not what I'm saying at all, kiko. I'm saying that the analogy breaks down because the scheduling matrices with regard to the two respective leagues are so totally different.

I think the scheduling differences between the two leagues has no real bearing on the question at hand.

Let me ask my question again: would it be acceptable to consider the Titans for a Pool C bid if their primary and secondary criteria nums were exactly what they are today but the CCIW advanced eight to the conference tournament?

[Gregory Sager]

I'm not the one who is arguing that the Titans shouldn't be considered for a Pool C berth. I must've said this to Bob three or four times last night. It's a little frustrating to me that it's not getting through.

I understand how the numbers work. I've never argued against them, or against their application. I've simply said all along that I also understand the gut impulse that there's something that seems off about a team getting a Pool C berth without having made the postseason tourney of the conference to which it belongs. That's all.

[GoPerry]

No, that's not what I'm saying at all, kiko. I'm saying that the analogy breaks down because the scheduling matrices with regard to the two respective leagues are so totally different.

I think the scheduling differences between the two leagues has no real bearing on the question at hand.

Let me ask my question again: would it be acceptable to consider the Titans for a Pool C bid if their primary and secondary criteria nums were exactly what they are today but the CCIW advanced eight to the conference tournament?

Well, for one thing, they'd either have one more win or one more loss.

And also, we're talking about a team that finished 18-9, .680.  .556 SOS strikes me as decent, but it's not the eye-popping .59, or those in the .60+ that some reach every year.  So in light of all that, I just don't see it.

[cardinalpride]

Rumblings that the national committee might have made some revisions.  Getting interesting.

I do understand that making the conf tourney is not one of the 5 or 6 listed criteria. However, to dismiss the fact that IWU didn't make the conf tourney is just not credible in my mind.  How can that fact possibly escape the committee (especially when one member is GG)?  At the very least it will come up when they notice the Titans haven't played as many games as the other teams, CCIW or not.  I wouldn't be shocked if they are not even regionally ranked.

In other words, the subjectivity of the committee members is absolutely a factor meaning they can take into account if a team doesn't make their own conference post-season.  Otherwise, Mr Snyder could run the #s and the whole of Pool C would spit out the bottom.  Then Dave's question #1 on Hoopsville for the Committee Chairman would be "So how do you justify to Bosko and Tom Slyder that IWU got selected over their teams ?'.  In my opinion, an answer of "the criteria is the criteria and the numbers are the numbers" would be tough to justify.

Is the CCIW regional rep not apart of the discussions concerning his own school? If not, does that extend to any CCIW school that comes up?

[Gregory Sager]

Is the CCIW regional rep not apart of the discussions concerning his own school? If not, does that extend to any CCIW school that comes up?

I seem to remember Ohio Wesleyan head coach Mike DeWitt saying during some past Hoopsville interview when he was on the national committee that he had to recuse himself from the conversation when OWU was discussed.

[bopol]

FWIW, I had only Augie as a Pool C pick and that was the last pick.  I could see the CCIW getting no Pool C selection this year very easily.  It will depend on the priorities of the committee.

My take was this year was similar to last year's WIAC - good teams, but no great teams.   

[kiko]

No, that's not what I'm saying at all, kiko. I'm saying that the analogy breaks down because the scheduling matrices with regard to the two respective leagues are so totally different.

I think the scheduling differences between the two leagues has no real bearing on the question at hand.

Let me ask my question again: would it be acceptable to consider the Titans for a Pool C bid if their primary and secondary criteria nums were exactly what they are today but the CCIW advanced eight to the conference tournament?

Well, for one thing, they'd either have one more win or one more loss.

And also, we're talking about a team that finished 18-9, .680.  .556 SOS strikes me as decent, but it's not the eye-popping .59, or those in the .60+ that some reach every year.  So in light of all that, I just don't see it.

One more loss or win doesn't come into play here.  The question is, if their criteria is exactly as it sits today, would you consider them?

When you quote their criteria and say "decent, not eye-popping... I just don't see it", I take it that you would consider them, and probably pass on them if other teams have better criteria.  That's great.  They make it or don't on the merits of the criteria.  What I don't get is why you take that path with an eight-team conference tournament, but if there is a four-team tournament, you push back on using the published criteria as the evaluation method.

[iwumichigander]

Is the CCIW regional rep not apart of the discussions concerning his own school? If not, does that extend to any CCIW school that comes up?

I seem to remember Ohio Wesleyan head coach Mike DeWitt saying during some past Hoopsville interview when he was on the national committee that he had to recuse himself from the conversation when OWU was discussed.

i think you have to recuse if your team being discussed or vote upon.  I seem to remember not only Mike DeWitt but also Bill Harris saying that.  I think it was one but not the only reason Bill Harris left the committee when Wheaton did not get ranked (other games were also being played at the time which ignored the criteria)

[USee]

I stand by my Bosko comments.

If IWU's season of work is better than other teams in the region or on the board, they should be considered. Conference tournaments are not part of the criteria, and shouldn't be. If we had a 2 team tournament, would team #3 and #4 not be considered for the NCAA? That's ridiculous. IWU is on the bubble because they had some great wins during the season and they had some bad losses. That's the reason their criteria are what they are and they should be evaluated against every other team similarly situated.

[joehakes]

If you are a coach or an administrator from a school under consideration you have to recuse yourself from the discussion of your team. On the national committee call, the person in question may have another person from the region come on the call so that the region doesn't lack for representation. On regional committees, it would be someone from that conference since the regional committee is made up of conferences reps.

This situation is really sticky and you can make arguments on both sides.  This is why the national phone calls can take 15 hours or more.  Having a three way tie for first and a tie for fourth in league standings is really unusual and this will make the committee earn their money more than it will make the committee make everyone happy.

[iwumichigander]

If you are a coach or an administrator from a school under consideration you have to recuse yourself from the discussion of your team. On the national committee call, the person in question may have another person from the region come on the call so that the region doesn't lack for representation. On regional committees, it would be someone from that conference since the regional committee is made up of conferences reps.

This situation is really sticky and you can make arguments on both sides.  This is why the national phone calls can take 15 hours or more.  Having a three way tie for first and a tie for fourth in league standings is really unusual and this will make the committee earn their money more than it will make the committee make everyone happy.

Thanks Joe as always a value contribution to the board!

[Gregory Sager]

Dave McHugh, Ryan Scott, and Bob Quillman just finished their mock Pool C selection. They had Augustana in as the 17th pick out of 21 Pool C teams. Illinois Wesleyan didn't make it, because UW-Oshkosh and its super-low .630 winning percentage blocked all of the Central Region teams ranked below them, including IWU and UW-Eau Claire.

[iwumichigander]

Dave McHugh, Ryan Scott, and Bob Quillman just finished their mock Pool C selection. They had Augustana in as the 17th pick out of 21 Pool C teams. Illinois Wesleyan didn't make it, because UW-Oshkosh and its super-low .630 winning percentage blocked all of the Central Region teams ranked below them, including IWU and UW-Eau Claire.

good job by the guys. 
When I first saw UWO in the regional ranking with that .630 WP and 10 losses versus D3 I said to myself (I do that frequently  ) Self - we in the central may have a problem.  But Self, if you wanted to find a way to block possible other controversies using UW-EC was a way to do it and after all you might get lucky and get them in.

[Gregory Sager]

UWO, actually, not UWEC. The Blugolds were blocked by UWO, too.