MBB: College Conference of Illinois and Wisconsin

[Mr. Ypsi]

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

UWO in the Central RRs above viable candidates would be a disaster!  Surely the Central Region committee is not THAT stupid, and (hopefully) the national committee would protect them if they were.

Perhaps they want to test how low one can go with WL% if the other criteria are exemplary, but I'd prefer that they not hold viable candidates hostage while they test their hypothesis!

[Greek Tragedy]

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.

If that is indeed the problem, why didn't they rank Oshkosh below IWU and Eau Claire then. Obviously someone is taking into account more than just their low winning %.

[Gregory Sager]

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

UWO in the Central RRs above viable candidates would be a disaster!  Surely the Central Region committee is not THAT stupid, and (hopefully) the national committee would protect them if they were.

Perhaps they want to test how low one can go with WL% if the other criteria are exemplary, but I'd prefer that they not hold viable candidates hostage while they test their hypothesis!

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.

If that is indeed the problem, why didn't they rank Oshkosh below IWU and Eau Claire then. Obviously someone is taking into account more than just their low winning %.

As D-Mac said several times, just because the committee re-ranks a team regionally doesn't mean that it therefore intends to pick that team for Pool C. It's simply obeying the criteria, and the criteria are favoring UWO over IWU, UWEC, Carthage, and North Park in terms of overall appeal in their eyes. But the .630 WL% is a sticking point that the committee won't get past, or so says the mock selectors. You two guys have to remember that UWO doesn't exist in isolation; it's on the table with seven other teams at any given time. There are plenty of instances in which a team gets to the table and stays there. Ryan, Dave, and Bob believed that UWO would stay at the table until the number of available berths ran out.

[kiko]

The disconnect in this speculation for me is the two-step the national committee is supposed to have done.  (We'll find out tomorrow whether they did or not.  All we have at this point is conjecture.)

They are supposed to have overruled the regional committee and bumped Oshkosh above a handful of bubblish Pool C contenders in the final regional rankings.  That would suggest to me that the Cheddar Titans would have a compelling case when that same national committee compared its credentials against bubblish Pool C contenders from other regions, assuming these teams' credentials mirror those of the teams in the Central that Oshkosh passed.  (This is, of course, a rather large assumption for which we have no data at present.)

I would assume that the national committee would overrule the region committee only if they felt there was a clear distinction between Oshkosh's creds and those they were pulled in front of.  (The leap of faith I am taking here is to assume the national committee will scrutinize region committee rankings, but that the national body may not want to micromanage or second-guess ranking decisions made by the region committees that reflect marginal differences of opinion.)

I have no idea how the extra-region hopefuls compare, credential-wise, to the Central Region teams said to have been exiled below Oshkosh by that same national committee.  But if they are similar, it would strike me as odd if Oshkosh's numbers were viewed as an asset by the national committee against in-region teams, but a liability by that same body in a national comparison.

[Greek Tragedy]

I completely understand the fact that whomever is at the table is going up against 7 other teams. And I'm not assuming because the committe re-ranks teams that they are intending to pick them as a Pool C. I don't think I ever implied that.

It really does seem like you are talking out both sides of your mouth. No offense to Greg or any of the other experts. Again, I'm not arguing that Oshkosh should or shouldn't get in. I would like them to because they are a WIAC team, but I won't lose sleep over it if they don't. Honestly, I never thought they had a chance. But it's quite irritating to hear you blame Oshkosh for blocking the other schools who, supposed, have better chances at Pool C bids.

First you say that they are simply obeying the criteria and that criteria is favoring them over IWU, Eau Claire and Carthage. But then you're saying one of the criteria (winning %) is blocking the others. If the committee first votes for Oshkosh to be ahead of them and then turns around and says, "Oh, we're blocking other teams" just move Oshkosh down. I understand that they are going up against 7 other regions, but if Oshkosh is good enough to be above IWU, Eau Claire and Carthage, but NOT GOOD ENOUGH to be selected at the Pool C table, what makes anyone think IWU, Eau Claire or Carthage are good enough to be selected if Oshkosh "wasn't in the way"?

I really don't understand this argument. If someone simply said, "Yeah, Oshkosh isn't good enough to be a Pool C" I would be fine with that and agree with that, but then to tack on, "Oh, well, they're blocking IWU, Eau Claire and Carthage," that annoys me.

[Gregory Sager]

I'm not entirely sure to whom you're referring as "you" in your post, Tom, but it appears to me that your "you" is the national committee. Please correct me if I'm wrong ... and remember, I'm just reiterating the conversation that took place on Hoopsville this evening. Please don't shoot the messenger.

I don't know if anybody from the committee will actually use "blocking" language in public. I think that for diplomacy's sake they may try to make their decision-making as opaque as possible with regard to the language that they use in these sorts of things. As kiko said, this is all conjecture ... and I wouldn't want to get caught in the snare of assuming the motives of anybody on any of the committees, either, whether regional or national.

[izzy stradlin]

I completely understand the fact that whomever is at the table is going up against 7 other teams. And I'm not assuming because the committe re-ranks teams that they are intending to pick them as a Pool C. I don't think I ever implied that.

It really does seem like you are talking out both sides of your mouth. No offense to Greg or any of the other experts. Again, I'm not arguing that Oshkosh should or shouldn't get in. I would like them to because they are a WIAC team, but I won't lose sleep over it if they don't. Honestly, I never thought they had a chance. But it's quite irritating to hear you blame Oshkosh for blocking the other schools who, supposed, have better chances at Pool C bids.

First you say that they are simply obeying the criteria and that criteria is favoring them over IWU, Eau Claire and Carthage. But then you're saying one of the criteria (winning %) is blocking the others. If the committee first votes for Oshkosh to be ahead of them and then turns around and says, "Oh, we're blocking other teams" just move Oshkosh down. I understand that they are going up against 7 other regions, but if Oshkosh is good enough to be above IWU, Eau Claire and Carthage, but NOT GOOD ENOUGH to be selected at the Pool C table, what makes anyone think IWU, Eau Claire or Carthage are good enough to be selected if Oshkosh "wasn't in the way"?

I really don't understand this argument. If someone simply said, "Yeah, Oshkosh isn't good enough to be a Pool C" I would be fine with that and agree with that, but then to tack on, "Oh, well, they're blocking IWU, Eau Claire and Carthage," that annoys me.

You are exactly right. I don't know where this "blocking" idea came from but I've heard it used on these boards for several years in multiple sports. There is no such thing as blocking. This way of taking one team from each region to a table doesn't change the tournament field whatsoever.  I realize that's the process they use but it makes zero sense unless you use two different sets of criteria (which would be another bigger issue-- however the national committee often adjusts the regional rankings). 

[Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan)]

I completely understand the fact that whomever is at the table is going up against 7 other teams. And I'm not assuming because the committe re-ranks teams that they are intending to pick them as a Pool C. I don't think I ever implied that.

It really does seem like you are talking out both sides of your mouth. No offense to Greg or any of the other experts. Again, I'm not arguing that Oshkosh should or shouldn't get in. I would like them to because they are a WIAC team, but I won't lose sleep over it if they don't. Honestly, I never thought they had a chance. But it's quite irritating to hear you blame Oshkosh for blocking the other schools who, supposed, have better chances at Pool C bids.

First you say that they are simply obeying the criteria and that criteria is favoring them over IWU, Eau Claire and Carthage. But then you're saying one of the criteria (winning %) is blocking the others. If the committee first votes for Oshkosh to be ahead of them and then turns around and says, "Oh, we're blocking other teams" just move Oshkosh down. I understand that they are going up against 7 other regions, but if Oshkosh is good enough to be above IWU, Eau Claire and Carthage, but NOT GOOD ENOUGH to be selected at the Pool C table, what makes anyone think IWU, Eau Claire or Carthage are good enough to be selected if Oshkosh "wasn't in the way"?

I really don't understand this argument. If someone simply said, "Yeah, Oshkosh isn't good enough to be a Pool C" I would be fine with that and agree with that, but then to tack on, "Oh, well, they're blocking IWU, Eau Claire and Carthage," that annoys me.

You are exactly right. I don't know where this "blocking" idea came from but I've heard it used on these boards for several years in multiple sports. There is no such thing as blocking. This way of taking one team from each region to a table doesn't change the tournament field whatsoever.  I realize that's the process they use but it makes zero sense unless you use two different sets of criteria (which would be another bigger issue-- however the national committee often adjusts the regional rankings).

The problem arises when you realize that while there are very specific criteria, there is no guidance on how to weigh it.  On the show, we had to make a choice: will the committee do something they've never done before and take a team with a sub .667 winning percentage or not.  We decided they wouldn't.  I think it's very possible we're wrong.

I'm not sure "blocking" was really at play.  The national committee has the ability to move teams after they are ranked by the region.  If they wanted to put IWU ahead of Oshkosh, they would have.  That was the argument in favor - that the committee left UWO there, so they are willing to pick them.  The argument against was that IWU has the same 17 wins, even if they have two fewer losses,it's the 17 that the committee really cares about.  I think a 17 win IWU team would only be competitive for the last two spots in our prediction.

Keene had a bettet SOS and two extra wins.  Even if we picked UWO, I think Keene is next, then Endicott, and probably still Mt St. Joe.  Which means IWU MIGHT have been the last team in.

They still might be, right?  It's just a projection.  I wouldn't be surprised if UWO and IWU are there instead of Mt St Joe and OWU.  Shoot, I wouldn't be surprised if we got all of the last four wrong.

But, it all hinges on whether or not the committee decides to do something they've never done before.  Deep down, I feel like they're going to, but I wasn't willing to take that risk last night.

[Titan Q]

Just FYI, the original Central ranking I heard was...

1. UW-River Falls
2. Wash U
3. UW-Whitewater
4. Augustana
5. Benedictine
6. UW-Eau Claire
7. UW-Oshkosh
8. Carthage

And then heard the national committee went this way (which we used last night)...

1. UW-River Falls
2. Wash U
3. UW-Whitewater
4. Augustana
5. Benedictine
6. UW-Oshkosh
7. Illinois Wesleyan
8. UW-Eau Claire

In our process, had IWU hit the board after Augie got picked (#17) - in other words, had IWU been ranked ahead of UW-Oshkosh - I'm confident IWU would have been picked somewhere in our final four picks.

* Keene State: .679/.576/3-4
* Endicott: .786/.522/3-4
* Mount St. Joseph: .769/.523/2-2
* Ohio Wesleyan: .731/.514/2-4 (IWU won at OWU)

* Illinois Wesleyan: .680/.556/4-2 (instead of 6-2, assuming Carthage not ranked)

[Titan Q]

As D-Mac said several times, just because the committee re-ranks a team regionally doesn't mean that it therefore intends to pick that team for Pool C. It's simply obeying the criteria, and the criteria are favoring UWO over IWU, UWEC, Carthage, and North Park in terms of overall appeal in their eyes. But the .630 WL% is a sticking point that the committee won't get past, or so says the mock selectors. You two guys have to remember that UWO doesn't exist in isolation; it's on the table with seven other teams at any given time. There are plenty of instances in which a team gets to the table and stays there. Ryan, Dave, and Bob believed that UWO would stay at the table until the number of available berths ran out.

If UW-Oshkosh is not picked (and if those final rankings were right), the whole thing will seem odd to me. The criteria the national committee is obeying in making regional ranking adjustments should be the same identical criteria used to select Pool C teams.  So if the national committee doesn't like .630 - if that is simply too low for Pool C - I don't understand why they would rank UWO over other Central options (IWU, UW-Eau Claire, Carthage, North Park). 

One example I aways think of - in 2008 IWU was 3-0 vs Wheaton but the regional committee appropriately ranked Wheaton higher, because Wheaton had a strong Pool C resume and IWU did not (and Wheaton got picked). To me, the Pool C candidates in the regional rankings have to be listed in order of Pool C viability because those rankings are directly used for the Pool C selection process.

I guess it is why I kind of expect to see UW-Oshkosh in the bracket that is released today.  But I could be completely wrong about that, who knows.

[Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan)]

As D-Mac said several times, just because the committee re-ranks a team regionally doesn't mean that it therefore intends to pick that team for Pool C. It's simply obeying the criteria, and the criteria are favoring UWO over IWU, UWEC, Carthage, and North Park in terms of overall appeal in their eyes. But the .630 WL% is a sticking point that the committee won't get past, or so says the mock selectors. You two guys have to remember that UWO doesn't exist in isolation; it's on the table with seven other teams at any given time. There are plenty of instances in which a team gets to the table and stays there. Ryan, Dave, and Bob believed that UWO would stay at the table until the number of available berths ran out.

If UW-Oshkosh is not picked (and if those final rankings were right), the whole thing will seem odd to me. The criteria the national committee is obeying in making regional ranking adjustments should be the same identical criteria used to select Pool C teams.  So if the national committee doesn't like .630 - if that is simply too low for Pool C - I don't understand why they would rank UWO over other Central options (IWU, UW-Eau Claire, Carthage, North Park).

I guess it is why I kind of expect to see UW-Oshkosh in the bracket that is released today.  But who knows.

I kind of agree, too - I could see UWO, KSC, IWU, Endicott as very possible. Or even Eau Claire in that last one.

The one question is the one we went over and over - which was whether 17 wins is just too low (although Amherst would argue its not).

[AppletonRocks]

Oshkosh is a very dangerous team.

They are relatively young veterans and play 3-4 frosh with regularity, especially in the second half of the season, where the quality wins increased and the losses were fewer. Crushed Whitewater in the WIAC tourney at home and a week earlier at Whitewater in a closer game. Defeated River Falls at River Falls and lost the WIAC final by 1 in a "either way" game. Put Eau Claire away twice, since they keep coming up as an alternative. 

I know, these aren't the supposed criteria.  I hope the committee rises above that. 

[bbfan44]

As D-Mac said several times, just because the committee re-ranks a team regionally doesn't mean that it therefore intends to pick that team for Pool C. It's simply obeying the criteria, and the criteria are favoring UWO over IWU, UWEC, Carthage, and North Park in terms of overall appeal in their eyes. But the .630 WL% is a sticking point that the committee won't get past, or so says the mock selectors. You two guys have to remember that UWO doesn't exist in isolation; it's on the table with seven other teams at any given time. There are plenty of instances in which a team gets to the table and stays there. Ryan, Dave, and Bob believed that UWO would stay at the table until the number of available berths ran out.

If UW-Oshkosh is not picked (and if those final rankings were right), the whole thing will seem odd to me. The criteria the national committee is obeying in making regional ranking adjustments should be the same identical criteria used to select Pool C teams.  So if the national committee doesn't like .630 - if that is simply too low for Pool C - I don't understand why they would rank UWO over other Central options (IWU, UW-Eau Claire, Carthage, North Park). 

One example I aways think of - in 2008 IWU was 3-0 vs Wheaton but the regional committee appropriately ranked Wheaton higher, because Wheaton had a strong Pool C resume and IWU did not (and Wheaton got picked). To me, the Pool C candidates in the regional rankings have to be listed in order of Pool C viability because those rankings are directly used for the Pool C selection process.

I guess it is why I kind of expect to see UW-Oshkosh in the bracket that is released today.  But I could be completely wrong about that, who knows.

And, as I recall, Wheaton was a great pick winning 3 playoff games before losing to Hope, at Hope, and missing the trip to Salem.

[iwumichigander]

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

thanks fixed

[Gregory Sager]

Augie plays St. Thomas @ Whitewater, WI.