MBB: College Conference of Illinois and Wisconsin

[markerickson]

In other words, the City Viking freshman class was arguably the worst recruiting class in the league.  Go after transfers like the Noreens.

[Dave 'd-mac' McHugh]

Yeah, the broadcast is good overall, but the Kozanitsky is driving me crazy.

Borderline forgivable for student announcers in the regular season; unforgivable in the FF.

I agree, talk about doing your homework as we have heard Greg Sager say so many times...

FYI - since I was on the call, we did do our homework and both my broadcast partner and I heard Coach Rose say to both of us John Koschnitzky's name as Kosh... not Kuz. He and I were under the impression it was Kuz until chatting with him a few hours before the game and we both heard him say it like Kosh. I know this simply because we commented to one another that we were under the wrong impression in the first place.

So, before assuming we aren't doing our homework - and did you even realize I was on the call? - understand we did do our homework and were given the wrong impression.

We corrected our mistake, but assuming we aren't doing our job is not be fair to us, either. There was no one from IWU here except the coaching staff to answer many of our questions (or at least no one came to us except coaching staff).

Congrats to IWU on a terrific run in the tourney and season. It wasn't the way I know many wanted the ride to end, but they ran into a buzz saw in Cabrini. Coach Rose made a great coaching move to start the second half to slow things down and it rattled Cabrini. But Coach Kahn made a terrific counter-move in adding the press and changing the tempo again. It was great to watch.

Also, there is a spot(s) available for the losing teams of the semifinals in the All-Star Game. I know MIT does not have any players eligible to play since almost all of their "seniors" actually have a year of eligibility available they plan to use next year while in graduate school. There are two players, but they weren't high in the NABC balloting, so no player from MIT will take part tomorrow. As for IWU, they have the ability to have at least one player (maybe more) play if they so choose. There will be at least 9 players from each team (there is an extra player on the West squad listed, but Georgia Milligan ended up being a scratch due to an injury he suffered last weekend - one report I got is he broke a bone in his foot).

Hope I get to see some more IWU play tomorrow, in this case.

I for one did realize you were on the call, as I tune in to Hoopsville and I am familiar with your work. You did look different because you were sporting a fancy suit for the big game!

My "homework" post probably came off as being pretty harsh, so for that I apologize...

Anyway, I was more commenting on Greg Sager's comments every time someone messes up a name. He says, and it is true, "do your homework." As I said in my initial post, overall, I thought you guys did a pretty good job and anyone else outside of those who follow IWU on the radio may not have even known it was being mispronounced.

It did stick out like a sore thumb to me, and I am unfamiliar with your broadcast partner, but he was the one really, really screwing it up. He did at times seem a little too happy when Cabrini would do something good, but that might be my misty, green-tinted, glasses speaking, I am really not sure.

The only change I would like to see in how it is broadcast would be that when they go to a timeout, maybe have the announcers keep talking with some background info about the teams rather than just go silent. There were a few Buick commercials, but they didn't have a commercial every break. Maybe just plug in all the commercials. I am pretty sure you don't run that part, but I just felt like saying it.

I guess you have to have a break from talking at some point, so that is probably not a fair thing to ask for.

You might want to check your glasses . My broadcast partner I think was more blown away by Cabrini's style... but also impressed with how IWU changed the game. He wasn't playing any favorites, I assure you. And it always sounds like we are happy about the other team when it is a neutral, but not boring broadcast .

As for the commercial breaks... I can't tell you what was with that. We were under the impression (as was our producer/director) that we were in breaks since those were being run by those in Atlanta where the signal was being sent before going out to all of you. So our silence was based on the fact we thought we were in break. Trust me, we were talking ton one another - if our audio was up you would have gotten an interesting background in how a broadcasting crew deals with breaks.

With regard to the call of the IWU/Cabrini game, I understand the "kuz" question and what led to the misunderstanding.

The thing I noticed was that is seemed the broadcasters were referring to Eliud Gonzalez as "Elliott." I was watching/listening on my computer so maybe it was the equipment rather than mispronunciation on the part of the broadcast team. 

Trust me, we were saying his name correctly... never crossed our mind to say Elliott. We both had that one down for sure!

[Mr. Ypsi]

Dave, I wasn't going to say anything further, but you brought it back up.  The problem was not Kuz vs. Kosh, the problem was you both kept adding a syllable after that!  Moot point now (he is a senior) but there is no A after either Kuz or Kosh.  Both of you insisted on Kosh-uh-nitsky all game.

What also got me (I think you had it right but not your partner) was Wez-lyan - it is Wes-lyan.  (Though, I confess, with no recording devices back then, it is impossible to know how John (or Charles) Wesley pronounced it!)

I confess to only being a sporadic Hoopsville listener - I though it was you, but was not positive.   The commercial dead-time, and the horribly short cutaway after the game I knew were the fault of the NCAA, not you guys.  (I was especially peeved not to see the net-cutting and trophy presentations for the Titan women!)

[kiko]

</LURK>

While the CCIW's non-conference winning percentage was at a low ebb last year as well as this year, a look inside the numbers shows that this was driven by three factors:

1. Millikin has been historically bad.  I won't belabor the myriad of evidence to this, but it put a drag on the conference's overall performance.
2. In the past two years, North Central has turned in the two lowest out-of-conference winning percentages of any CCIW champion in recent memory.
3. The two seventh-place teams -- Elmhurst and North Park -- had winning percentages that were well below the typical norms for seventh place teams.

In short:  most of the conference performed at levels reasonably close to historical norms.  But the top and bottom drove the aggregate winning percentage into the sub-basement.

Using nums from d3hoops and cciw.org, the conference's overall out-of-conference record since 2001-02 is 778-379, or a .672 winning percentage.

Here's how that looks year-by-year:

Year	W	L	PCT
2000-01	66	22	.750
2001-02	60	33	.645
2002-03	61	30	.670
2003-04	62	28	.689
2004-05	63	27	.700
2005-06	66	37	.641
2006-07	69	26	.726
2007-08	69	31	.690
2008-09	76	23	.768
2009-10	64	39	.621
2010-11	60	40	.600
2011-12	62	43	.590
TOTAL ERA	778	379	.672

A few observations:

- Yes, the overall winning percentage has been down -- the last three years, in fact, have each represented a new low during this timeframe.

- Millikin has been just awful the past two seasons.  On only one other occasion during this twelve year span has the bottom team failed to win at least five games (North Park was 2-9 in 2005-06).  Millikin has won twice -- total -- in two years.

- The conference's seventh place teams have also regressed.  Elmhurst (last year) and North Park (this year) were 5-6 and 4-7, respectively.  That doesn't sound bad on the surface, but until only two other seventh-place teams since 2000-01 have won five or fewer games.  (North Central was 4-7 in 2001-02 and Millikin was 5-6 in the other low-water year, 2009-10.)

- Looking at it another way, from 2000-01 through 2009-10, the seventh place team (70-40 / .636) and eighth place team (54-56 / .491) were significantly better than what we've had the past two years (.409 and .091, respectively).

-----

North Central is the other major reason this year's percentage is down.  The Cards' early-season struggles due to injury are well-documented and, it is fair to say, not representative of the team's overall level.  But since 2000-01, no other conference champion has lost as many as the six games the Redbirds lost outside the conference this year or the eight they dropped last year.  Only two others have lost as many as four games.  From 2000-01 through 2009-10, the conference champions turned in an aggregate 113-27 (.807) record.  North Central has finished 4-8 (.333) and 10-6 (.625).

This puts two questions on the table for me: should the perception of the conference be colored by Millikin's recent performance?  If you argue top-to-bottom matters, then yes, but IMO, taking this all the way to #8 misses the forest for the trees.  Looking at the top six is a reasonable perspective IMO.

The second question: How should North Central's slow start be factored in?  10-6 is no great shakes, but is it reasonable to mark the conference down for the performance of a sweet sixteen team?

[kiko]

More fun with numbers.  If you simply lop off the bottom two and say "the bottom is worse than it has been in a while; that's what dragged the overall numbers down", the story changes slightly.  This year the top six went 57-26 (.687), as compared to the 643-250 (.720) aggregate by teams in those positions from 2000-01 through present.  It's closer (.033 below the median as opposed to .082 if you consider all teams), but is still the third-worst mark during that era.

But as noted above, North Central's early-season struggles were an anomoly for a conference champion -- there simply hasn't been a conference winner that has struggled like the Cards have the past two years in November and December. 


Looking at the #2 through #6 teams during this same era, here's how they performed:

Year	W	L	PCT
2000-01	44	11	.800
2001-02	36	19	.655
2002-03	37	21	.638
2003-04	40	14	.741
2004-05	42	14	.750
2005-06	45	21	.682
2006-07	44	15	.746
2007-08	44	19	.698
2008-09	45	16	.738
2009-10	42	23	.646
2010-11	50	16	.758
2011-12	47	20	.701
TOTAL ERA	516	209	.712

And here's #1, 7, and 8 in that same span:

Year	W	L	PCT
2000-01	22	11	.667
2001-02	24	14	.632
2002-03	24	9	.727
2003-04	22	14	.611
2004-05	21	13	.618
2005-06	21	16	.568
2006-07	25	11	.694
2007-08	25	12	.676
2008-09	31	7	.816
2009-10	22	16	.579
2010-11	10	24	.294 (!)
2011-12	15	23	.395 (!)
TOTAL ERA	262	170	.606

Better performance from the top (which is highly probably) and the bottm (ummmm, we'll see about that) would go a long way toward pulling the aggregate CCIW winning percentage back to typical levels.

[Dave 'd-mac' McHugh]

Dave, I wasn't going to say anything further, but you brought it back up.  The problem was not Kuz vs. Kosh, the problem was you both kept adding a syllable after that!  Moot point now (he is a senior) but there is no A after either Kuz or Kosh.  Both of you insisted on Kosh-uh-nitsky all game.

What also got me (I think you had it right but not your partner) was Wez-lyan - it is Wes-lyan.  (Though, I confess, with no recording devices back then, it is impossible to know how John (or Charles) Wesley pronounced it!)

I confess to only being a sporadic Hoopsville listener - I though it was you, but was not positive.   The commercial dead-time, and the horribly short cutaway after the game I knew were the fault of the NCAA, not you guys.  (I was especially peeved not to see the net-cutting and trophy presentations for the Titan women!)

I didn't bring it back up! Sheesh... and I am not sure what I was saying or not saying now. At one point I know I had confused myself because I had lost track of what in the world was going on with his name - honestly, I wanted to throw something every time he had a great shot or good play - kidding.

And if I mispronounced Wesleyan, I would have heard about it from my father who graduated from the original Wesleyan in Connecticut... I would have heard about it. Instead, he thanked me!

And to be clear, it was not the NCAA... it was Turner - they control the broadcasts. NCAA.com is the portal, but we sent the signal back to Atlanta (i.e. Turner HQ). I know at least from the men's point of view, the ENTIRE broadcasts are available online. Check out the link Q posted earlier and go from there. Now, my computer has a major lip-synch issue... not sure if that is real... or just issues I am dealing with on my laptop.

[Mr. Ypsi]

kiko, outstanding work - +k!

[Mr. Ypsi]

Dave, understood!

My classmate, iwu70, was so concerned he would misspell Koschnitsky that he always called him K-man!

[sac]

Hope will probably be playing half the CCIW next year with games against Carthage, Wheaton, Illinois Wesleyan for sure.  Earlier this year Matt Neil mentioned on his hoopsville interview they were trying to get Millikin to come up to Holland for one of the tournaments as well.

[NCF]

</LURK>

While the CCIW's non-conference winning percentage was at a low ebb last year as well as this year, a look inside the numbers shows that this was driven by three factors:

1. Millikin has been historically bad.  I won't belabor the myriad of evidence to this, but it put a drag on the conference's overall performance.
2. In the past two years, North Central has turned in the two lowest out-of-conference winning percentages of any CCIW champion in recent memory.
3. The two seventh-place teams -- Elmhurst and North Park -- had winning percentages that were well below the typical norms for seventh place teams.

In short:  most of the conference performed at levels reasonably close to historical norms.  But the top and bottom drove the aggregate winning percentage into the sub-basement.

Using nums from d3hoops and cciw.org, the conference's overall out-of-conference record since 2001-02 is 778-379, or a .672 winning percentage.

Here's how that looks year-by-year:

Year	W	L	PCT
2000-01	66	22	.750
2001-02	60	33	.645
2002-03	61	30	.670
2003-04	62	28	.689
2004-05	63	27	.700
2005-06	66	37	.641
2006-07	69	26	.726
2007-08	69	31	.690
2008-09	76	23	.768
2009-10	64	39	.621
2010-11	60	40	.600
2011-12	62	43	.590
TOTAL ERA	778	379	.672

A few observations:

- Yes, the overall winning percentage has been down -- the last three years, in fact, have each represented a new low during this timeframe.

- Millikin has been just awful the past two seasons.  On only one other occasion during this twelve year span has the bottom team failed to win at least five games (North Park was 2-9 in 2005-06).  Millikin has won twice -- total -- in two years.

- The conference's seventh place teams have also regressed.  Elmhurst (last year) and North Park (this year) were 5-6 and 4-7, respectively.  That doesn't sound bad on the surface, but until only two other seventh-place teams since 2000-01 have won five or fewer games.  (North Central was 4-7 in 2001-02 and Millikin was 5-6 in the other low-water year, 2009-10.)

- Looking at it another way, from 2000-01 through 2009-10, the seventh place team (70-40 / .636) and eighth place team (54-56 / .491) were significantly better than what we've had the past two years (.409 and .091, respectively).

-----

North Central is the other major reason this year's percentage is down.  The Cards' early-season struggles due to injury are well-documented and, it is fair to say, not representative of the team's overall level.  But since 2000-01, no other conference champion has lost as many as the six games the Redbirds lost outside the conference this year or the eight they dropped last year.  Only two others have lost as many as four games.  From 2000-01 through 2009-10, the conference champions turned in an aggregate 113-27 (.807) record.  North Central has finished 4-8 (.333) and 10-6 (.625).

This puts two questions on the table for me: should the perception of the conference be colored by Millikin's recent performance?  If you argue top-to-bottom matters, then yes, but IMO, taking this all the way to #8 misses the forest for the trees.  Looking at the top six is a reasonable perspective IMO.

The second question: How should North Central's slow start be factored in?  10-6 is no great shakes, but is it reasonable to mark the conference down for the performance of a sweet sixteen team?

Great job with the statistics! IMHO- if you want to say it was a down year for the CCIW, then maybe it was a down year in D3 this year as well. The fact is that three of your conference members made it to the sweet sixteen and one to the Final Four. No offense, but as a player, I would rather be playing my best in March than in November. And in reality, that is all that matters. If North Central had the worst non-conference record of any CCIW champion, who cares? They are still the CHAMPIONS, both regular season and tournament. And. they made it to the Sweet Sixteen. The CCIW in many sports is top heavy now, but it has not always been that way. Do you need to have a strong conference from top to bottom to be strong outside the conference? The top four (and I think Carthage will make it five next season) will always push each other on any given night. It obviously didn't hurt the teams that made it to the Dance.

[Titan Q]

What also got me (I think you had it right but not your partner) was Wez-lyan - it is Wes-lyan.  (Though, I confess, with no recording devices back then, it is impossible to know how John (or Charles) Wesley pronounced it!)

This was my beef after watching the archive.  The play-by-play guy (not Dave) mispronounced "Wesleyan" (using "Wezzleyan") the entire game.  Seems like extremely lazy broadcasting on behalf of the play-by-play guy to get the school name wrong.  For pete's sake, he could have just asked his broadcast partner.

[Pat Coleman]

About the name thing: I have definitely been misled even when doing my homework. I've had both SID and coach give me bad information. Once I had to go down to the field before the Stagg Bowl, approach a kid and ask him how to say his last name.

You would think coaches would know how to say Lisa's names, but not all do. And remember because IWU had two teams alive this weekend, there wasn't an SID to confer with, since Stew was covering both remotely.

Just food for thought for Ypsi. Gotta consider what the situation is actually like on site.

[TitansIWU]

During the starting line-up portion of the NCAA broadcast, the broadcast partner I believe the very first time called him...

"Jason" Koz-ah-nitzy.

In 20 years when John goes to relive his experience by watching the video with his family, he won't be able to prove he was even in the game!

To me, it is a weird name to look at on paper, but I would almost swear I have heard Dave say it correctly on Hoopsville in one of the recent Ron Rose interviews.

[iwumichigander]

Dave, I wasn't going to say anything further, but you brought it back up.  The problem was not Kuz vs. Kosh, the problem was you both kept adding a syllable after that!  Moot point now (he is a senior) but there is no A after either Kuz or Kosh.  Both of you insisted on Kosh-uh-nitsky all game.

What also got me (I think you had it right but not your partner) was Wez-lyan - it is Wes-lyan.  (Though, I confess, with no recording devices back then, it is impossible to know how John (or Charles) Wesley pronounced it!)

I confess to only being a sporadic Hoopsville listener - I though it was you, but was not positive.   The commercial dead-time, and the horribly short cutaway after the game I knew were the fault of the NCAA, not you guys.  (I was especially peeved not to see the net-cutting and trophy presentations for the Titan women!)

I didn't bring it back up! Sheesh... and I am not sure what I was saying or not saying now. At one point I know I had confused myself because I had lost track of what in the world was going on with his name - honestly, I wanted to throw something every time he had a great shot or good play - kidding.

And if I mispronounced Wesleyan, I would have heard about it from my father who graduated from the original Wesleyan in Connecticut... I would have heard about it. Instead, he thanked me!

And to be clear, it was not the NCAA... it was Turner - they control the broadcasts. NCAA.com is the portal, but we sent the signal back to Atlanta (i.e. Turner HQ). I know at least from the men's point of view, the ENTIRE broadcasts are available online. Check out the link Q posted earlier and go from there. Now, my computer has a major lip-synch issue... not sure if that is real... or just issues I am dealing with on my laptop.

And, hum, not the many years ago most posters were agonizing over the limited broadcast coverage - and mostly audio at that.  I'll take a couple of unintended boo-boos over limited coverage

[Dave 'd-mac' McHugh]

What also got me (I think you had it right but not your partner) was Wez-lyan - it is Wes-lyan.  (Though, I confess, with no recording devices back then, it is impossible to know how John (or Charles) Wesley pronounced it!)

This was my beef after watching the archive.  The play-by-play guy (not Dave) mispronounced "Wesleyan" (using "Wezzleyan") the entire game.  Seems like extremely lazy broadcasting on behalf of the play-by-play guy to get the school name wrong.  For pete's sake, he could have just asked his broadcast partner.

FYI - EVERYONE mispronounced this in Salem. They are ODAC (i.e. Virginia Wesleyan) and I heard the video presentations at the banquet (and in the front lobby), coaches and players from other teams, "dignitaries", etc. ALL mispronounce Wesleyan. I wasn't about to go around to every single person I heard say it wrong and correct them... furthermore, I didn't see it happening from the IWU contingent.