MBB: College Conference of Illinois and Wisconsin

[CCIWchamps]

Q- is brandeis the only example of a team with a sub .700 winning percentage making it? Mind you I see it as a very remote possibily that Wheaton makes it as a C given that IWU will have a better resume and Wheaton would have to be a 3rd team from the CCIW. I also haven't studied the national picture much as I have been fairly certain the Thunder had no shot but Isuppose stranger things have happened.

I think there are some other sub-.700 Pool C's, but I'd have to look.

For Wheaton to get a Pool C I think it would have to take some luck...and I know Mike Schauer's theology does not believe in luck.

On the other hand to all this discussion, maybe he's just planning on winning the AQ with some good old fashioned defense?

[Sideline Fan]

I'm a regular reader of this board, but a new poster period, so I guess that qualifies me to use the sports radio "long time, first time" descriptor. Full disclosure, while not an alum, I am partial to the Thunder.

Not to overlook the final weekend, which could alter the playoff scenarios should any team slip up, I thought I might attempt to start some chatter on those matchups. I looked up each teams records versus the other playoff teams, as well as used Titan Q's CCIW quality of wins system. Here's how it came out:

1. Carthage (4-2 record, +0)
vs IWU      Jan. 30   W   +0
at IWU      Jan. 9   L   +0
vs Wheaton   Jan. 6   W   +0
at Wheaton   Feb. 3   W   +1
vs Augie      Feb. 6   L   -1
at Augie      Jan. 16   W   +0
         
#2 IWU (3-3 record, +0)
vs Carthage   Jan. 9   W   +0
at Carthage   Jan. 30   L   +0
vs Wheaton   Feb. 13   L   -1
at Wheaton   Jan. 20   L   +0
vs Augie      Jan. 27   W   +0
at Augie      Feb. 17   W   +1

#3 Wheaton (4-2 record, +1)
vs Carthage   Feb. 3   L   -1
at Carthage   Jan. 6   L   +0
vs IWU      Jan. 20   W   +0
at IWU      Feb. 13   W   +1
vs Augie      Jan. 13   W   +0
at Augie      Feb. 10   W   +1

#4 Augie (1-5 record, -2)
vs Carthage   Jan. 16   L   -1
at Carthage   Feb. 6   W   +1
vs IWU      Feb. 17   L   -1
at IWU      Jan. 27   L   +0
vs Wheaton   Feb. 10   L   -1
at Wheaton   Jan. 13   L   +0

In a lose and you're out scenario, anything can happen. Wheaton does appear to be a very strong #3 seed. However, it is very difficult to beat a competitive team three times in the same season. Each IWU game has been extremely competitive. If they can get past IWU, perhaps that will play into their favor should they meet Carthage.

[CCIWFAN3]

I've never believed in the "it's hard to beat a team 3 times in a season" theory. That's just an excuse.  I hate that phrase.  My philosophy is, if I've beat you twice this season, then I know how to beat you...you don't know how to beat me.  Every  game... whether it's the 1st meeting, 2nd or 3rd all comes down to execution, playing hard, and who wants it more.

[Titan Q]

In a lot of ways (including the Pool C implications), this sets up like 2007-08, when IWU beat Wheaton 3 times.

http://www.iwu.edu/~iwunews/sports/mbb2008/IWUMBB16.HTM

http://www.iwu.edu/~iwunews/sports/mbb2008/MWHE23.HTM

http://www.iwu.edu/~iwunews/sports/mbb2008/08CCIW01.HTM


All very tight games.

[usee]

And that was Kent Raymond's Thunder that made it into the tourney and advanced to the elite 8. (the 3rd IWU win was on a neutral floor in the CCIW tourney)

[Titan Q]

Welcome Sideline Fan!

[usee]

Sideline Fan- Welcome to the board as well. I will point out (before Sager does) you miscalculated your rankings above. Carthage should be +1 by virtue of a win @Augie.

[CCIWFAN3]

The coaches in this league are all so well prepared.  They have a main strategy and counters for it...plan b, c etc.  "It's hard to beat a team 3 times" is a junior high quote.

[usee]

In a lot of ways (including the Pool C implications), this sets up like 2007-08, when IWU beat Wheaton 3 times.

http://www.iwu.edu/~iwunews/sports/mbb2008/IWUMBB16.HTM

http://www.iwu.edu/~iwunews/sports/mbb2008/MWHE23.HTM

http://www.iwu.edu/~iwunews/sports/mbb2008/08CCIW01.HTM


All very tight games.

Q, What I remember most about these games is that while the score was close, none of these games was very tight in my view. In the 1st two meetings IWU never trailed and led by 7-10 pts at different times. In the conference tourney, Wheaton let by 7 or 8 and once IWU got the lead back midway through the 1st half they never trailed again. My memory from those games is of frustration that we could have played the Titans 10 times that year and never won. I remember posting after the CCIW tourney that IWU was just better than the Thunder.

Those games may have been close but they were not "tight" or ever really contested.

[Titan Q]

Q, What I remember most about these games is that while the score was close, none of these games was very tight in my view. In the 1st two meetings IWU never trailed and led by 7-10 pts at different times. In the conference tourney, Wheaton let by 7 or 8 and once IWU got the lead back midway through the 1st half they never trailed again. My memory from those games is of frustration that we could have played the Titans 10 times that year and never won. I remember posting after the CCIW tourney that IWU was just better than the Thunder.

Those games may have been close but they were not "tight" or ever really contested.

The funny thing about the IWU/Wheaton series that season is that I think most would agree that Wheaton, overall, was a little better team than IWU...yet when pitted against each other one-on-one, Wheaton had some matchup problems with that Titans team.

This year has kind of played out in similar fashion.  I believe IWU, overall, is a deeper, more balanced, more talented team than Wheaton.  But the Titans have a couple big matchup problems with this Thunder squad.  IWU struggles to contain a stud, athletic 4 (which Wheaton has).  And big 2's (ala Ben Panner, or Wash U's Aaron Thompson) are a problem for the Titans on both ends of the floor since IWU's guards are small.

I'm really looking forward to that 3rd IWU/Wheaton game in Kenosha.  Should be a great game.

[CCIWFAN3]

Are you going Q?

[Titan Q]

Are you going Q?

Trying to figure out exactly how I'm going to get from Columbia, MO to Kenosha, WI in the most efficient fashion, but yes, wouldn't miss it.

[Sideline Fan]

Thanks for the greetings, TitanQ and USee. My apologies for the miscalculation. Carthage should indeed be 4-2, +1.

CCIWFAN3, with all due respect to your philosophical outlook, let me offer a rebuttal in an attempt to rise above a "junior high quote." (I'd lose all credibility can't let myself get shot down quite that easily on my first post.) Please keep my original quote in mind, "However, it is very difficult to beat a competitive team three times in the same season. Each IWU game has been extremely competitive."

I've never believed in the "it's hard to beat a team 3 times in a season" theory. That's just an excuse.  I hate that phrase.  My philosophy is, if I've beat you twice this season, then I know how to beat you...you don't know how to beat me.  Every  game... whether it's the 1st meeting, 2nd or 3rd all comes down to execution, playing hard, and who wants it more.

To begin with, I agree with you provided you are the more talented team in the matchup. If that is the case, then indeed the outcome almost without exception comes down to "execution, playing hard, and who wants it more." So, you'll notice I referenced competitive matchups assuming roughly equally talented teams. Both IWU-Wheaton matchups have been decided in a few late possessions (Jan. 20: 66-65, 5 ties, 4 lead changes, both teams led by as many as 7, but a one-possession game with 12 seconds remaining. Feb. 13: 66-59, 2 ties, 4 lead changes, Wheaton led by as many as 9, but a one-possession game with 5 minutes remaining). Now, I wasn't at either game in person, but did watch online. It appeared to me that Wheaton had some measure of control in both games, but each was highly competitive. That said, let me take your philosophy, "if I've beat you twice this season, then I know how to beat you...you don't know how to beat me," and use it in relation to your next quote.

The coaches in this league are all so well prepared.  They have a main strategy and counters for it...plan b, c etc.  "It's hard to beat a team 3 times" is a junior high quote.

As you state, the team that has won twice knows how to beat the other team. In your second quote you reference the quality of coaches in the league, specifically in preparation. I'm sure you would agree the four playoff coaches are among the best in the league as well. The inverse of your statement is precisely the basis of my belief it is difficult to beat a competitive team 3 times: the losing coach knows exactly how the opponent is winning. In the first matchup, a coach must rely on tapes of other opponents to develop a strategy. So, at that point, the strategy is an untested theory of how to beat an opponent. In the second, there is tape from the previous matchup to confirm the success of the strategy. However, in the third matchup the losing coach has tape of both previous matchups  to break down the victor's strategy. Given the level of coaching in the league, which is particularly excellent among the playoff teams, and, again assuming competitive teams, this situation provides the losing coach a strategical opportunity. He knows the opponents strategy and has a full season of tape to come up with the correct counter-strategy. Or, if he believes he has the correct counter-strategy, but previous execution was poor, he has the time to work specifically on his team's execution complete with video examples of their poor previous execution resulting in defeat. Additionally, one would expect a team's execution to improve in the second, or third, attempt at a strategy. (Note that this supports your claim on execution. My caveat being that execution of a strategy improves by the third matchup.) Given the quality of coaching in the league, this would seem to be a common occurrence. Again, remember, I'm talking about competitive teams with roughly equal talent.

Now, as TitanQ has pointed out, there are certainly examples of competitive matchups where one team wins three times (or more). However, there are also numerous historical examples of competitive matchups that split 2-1 over the course of three games.

My apologies for the long post, but I wanted to be sure I at least rose to the level of a high school freshman in my response. All teasing aside, I'm hoping for an exciting CCIW tournament.

[74impala]

Have the game times for the tournament been decided?

[usee]

Sideline Fan- impressive use of the quote function as well as length in your early posting career. Some would even call it "Sageresque".