MBB: College Conference of Illinois and Wisconsin

[Dave 'd-mac' McHugh]

Does anyone know what the top 3-4 teams were in the Midwest Region in the final NCAA regional rankings?

1) NCC  2) WashU 3) IWU ... not sure about 4.  This is not guaranteed but was alluded to by Dave on Hoopsville that he had seen or heard about the final rankings and NCC had jumped up past WashU to #1.

#1 - North Central
#2 - Wash U
#3 - Illinois Wesleyan
#4 - Rose-Hulman

[Titan Q]

Congrats to IWU coach Ron Rose on his COY award for piloting his Weenies to the regular season conference championship. I do wish however, that the award was chosen by a vote of the conference head coaches rather than just automatically being given to the coach of the team that finishes 1st. I believe a coaches vote is how the award is chosen in football.

Personally, I think the coach of the 1st place team certainly merits the award in many years. Especially if he is the coach of the team that was picked first, and fended off a strong challenge or challenges from another team/teams. However, I think that most often the best choice for POY is the coach whose team exceeded expectations by the widest margin. Of course, a tie is possible under this scenario. IWU probably didn't exceed their own expectations this year, but they exceeded probably many of the conference members expectations, as they were picked to finish 2nd, but captured the championship instead. In that Coach Rose certainly exceeded expectations in a very successful season.

However, to me, the COY is either Millikin coach Nadelhoffer or Wheaton coach Schauer. Perhaps a tie. Both guided their teams to places 2 slots above where they were picked to finish. If I have to pick just one, I guess in light of their recent record plus the fact he started 5 freshmen, I'd give it to Coach Nadelhoffer.     

Bottom line, I'd just like to see the award be the result of a vote rather than just routinely being given to the 1st place coach. 

I totally agree the COY decision should be voted on by the coaches. I think it's a cop out to award it to the conference champion. It is true that in football they vote on it. Now, the reality is most of the time the award goes to the conference champion, but not always.

In the case of this years COY for the CCIW. If it HAD come to a vote, I am pretty sure Ron Rose wins it going away for the reasons Q has already listed. Nadelhoffer is a distant second and Schauer third on my ballot. The fact is we have some pretty good coaches in the CCIW with these three along with Raridon, Bosko, Scherer, Slyder and Blazer thrower. That's one of the main reasons we all get to see such good basketball. I don't think there are many conferences with the top down coaching talent the CCIW has. It's a big reason we see such good competition every night and different teams are at the top each year.

A couple thoughts...

I'd like for it to be a vote too, and not just an automatic, but I also think a strong case can be made that the coach that recruits the right players, develops them, and leads those players to a conference title should be the Coach of the Year just about every season (not all).  AndOne seems to suggest that the award should go to the coach that most outperforms the CCIW preseason coaches poll, and my biggest concern is that seems to completely factor out the importance of recruiting.  I think part of a "Coach of the Year" award is going out and getting great players - players who get you picked really high in the preseason poll.  I don't think you should be penalized in the Coach of the Year voting because you took the floor in November with the best players.

But let's say the 2013 award was about outperforming expectations.  Below is the 2013 preseason coaches poll, and next to it is the average number of CCIW wins for that place in the standings over the course of the last 10 seasons heading into this year:

1st, North Central (11.4)
2nd, Illinois Wesleyan (10.1)
3rd, Carthage (9.6)
4th, Augustana (8.5)
5th, Wheaton (6.8)
6th, Elmhurst (5.2)
7th, North Park (3.2)
8th, Millikin (1.2)

And here is how each team finished 2013, and differential from that 10-year average (rounding the 10-year average to closest win number).

Illinois Wesleyan: 13-1 (+3)
North Central: 11-3 (+0)
Wheaton: 10-4 (+3)
Augustana: 8-6 (-1)
Carthage: 7-7 (-3)
Millikin: 4-10 (+3)
Elmhurst: 2-12 (-3)
North Park: 1-13 (-2)

IWU, Wheaton, and Millikin all won 3 games more than what one might expect based on their positioning in the preseason coaches poll.  I guess I'm just saying, the issue of which team outperformed expectations the most is certainly debatable.  And if that's sort of a toss-up, don't you have to go with the coach that won the league, and finished 13-1?  I think Ron Rose comes out pretty well under the "outperform expectations" philosophy too.

Just seems to me this is a year where the CCIW Coach of the Year award is pretty clear cut.

[kiko]

Congrats to IWU coach Ron Rose on his COY award for piloting his Weenies to the regular season conference championship. I do wish however, that the award was chosen by a vote of the conference head coaches rather than just automatically being given to the coach of the team that finishes 1st. I believe a coaches vote is how the award is chosen in football.

Personally, I think the coach of the 1st place team certainly merits the award in many years. Especially if he is the coach of the team that was picked first, and fended off a strong challenge or challenges from another team/teams. However, I think that most often the best choice for POY is the coach whose team exceeded expectations by the widest margin. Of course, a tie is possible under this scenario. IWU probably didn't exceed their own expectations this year, but they exceeded probably many of the conference members expectations, as they were picked to finish 2nd, but captured the championship instead. In that Coach Rose certainly exceeded expectations in a very successful season.

However, to me, the COY is either Millikin coach Nadelhoffer or Wheaton coach Schauer. Perhaps a tie. Both guided their teams to places 2 slots above where they were picked to finish. If I have to pick just one, I guess in light of their recent record plus the fact he started 5 freshmen, I'd give it to Coach Nadelhoffer.     

Bottom line, I'd just like to see the award be the result of a vote rather than just routinely being given to the 1st place coach. 

I totally agree the COY decision should be voted on by the coaches. I think it's a cop out to award it to the conference champion. It is true that in football they vote on it. Now, the reality is most of the time the award goes to the conference champion, but not always.

In the case of this years COY for the CCIW. If it HAD come to a vote, I am pretty sure Ron Rose wins it going away for the reasons Q has already listed. Nadelhoffer is a distant second and Schauer third on my ballot. The fact is we have some pretty good coaches in the CCIW with these three along with Raridon, Bosko, Scherer, Slyder and Blazer thrower. That's one of the main reasons we all get to see such good basketball. I don't think there are many conferences with the top down coaching talent the CCIW has. It's a big reason we see such good competition every night and different teams are at the top each year.

A couple thoughts...

I'd like for it to be a vote too, and not just an automatic, but I also think a strong case can be made that the coach that recruits the right players, develops them, and leads those players to a conference title should be the Coach of the Year just about every season (not all).  AndOne seems to suggest that the award should go to the coach that most outperforms the CCIW preseason coaches poll, and my biggest concern is that seems to completely factor out the importance of recruiting.  I think part of a "Coach of the Year" award is going out and getting great players - players who get you picked really high in the preseason poll.  I don't think you should be penalized in the Coach of the Year voting because you took the floor in November with the best players.

But let's say the 2013 award was about outperforming expectations.  Below is the 2013 preseason coaches poll, and next to it is the average number of CCIW wins for that place in the standings over the course of the last 10 seasons heading into this year:

1st, North Central (11.4)
2nd, Illinois Wesleyan (10.1)
3rd, Carthage (9.6)
4th, Augustana (8.5)
5th, Wheaton (6.8)
6th, Elmhurst (5.2)
7th, North Park (3.2)
8th, Millikin (1.2)

And here is how each team finished 2013, and differential from that 10-year average (rounding the 10-year average to closest win number).

Illinois Wesleyan: 13-1 (+3)
North Central: 11-3 (+0)
Wheaton: 10-4 (+3)
Augustana: 8-6 (-1)
Carthage: 7-7 (-3)
Millikin: 4-10 (+3)
Elmhurst: 2-12 (-3)
North Park: 1-13 (-2)

IWU, Wheaton, and Millikin all won 3 games more than what one might expect based on their positioning in the preseason coaches poll.  I guess I'm just saying, the issue of which team outperformed expectations the most is certainly debatable.  And if that's sort of a toss-up, don't you have to go with the coach that won the league, and finished 13-1?  I think Ron Rose comes out pretty well under the "outperform expectations" philosophy too.

Just seems to me this is a year where the CCIW Coach of the Year award is pretty clear cut.

I don't know about 'clear cut'.  I think all of this proves exactly what AndOne suggested when he broached this subject initially -- an equally good case can be made for Ron Rose, Mike Schauer, or Matt Nadelhoffer.

The recruiting argument cuts both ways -- Ron Rose should get credit for doing a tremendous job of recruiting.  IWU is usually among the deepest teams in the league (and this year was a clear leader in that department).   And he's not just recruited great talent, but great talent that fits a specific style of play that he wants to put on the floor.  IWU has been lauded for being exceptionally unselfish this year -- he deserves significant credit for that.

But Matt Nadelhoffer should get credit for recruiting as well.  To say that the Millikin cupboard was barren of any useful parts would be an understatement.  He was starting from ground zero and had to convince kids to come into a program that (1) had bottomed out, (2) was not exactly in a desirable locale, and (3) was clearly going to take its lumps more often than not for the near future.  He had to, in essence, sell a vision rather than the present.  There was an interview earlier this year in which he said he told the kids he was recruiting last year (i.e. - this year's freshmen) specifically *not* to come watch Millikin play.  Ron Rose could show a recruit a beautiful modern arena with large crowds and a deep connection to both campus and community.  Matt Nadelhoffer basically had to say to his recruits 'trust me'.

So is the argument with the outcome?  No, if a vote of coaches placed Ron Rose at the top of the list I don't think anyone would have a reasonable argument against it.  But an equally compelling case could be made for select other coaches.

The argument is specifically with the process.  Look at it another way -- had North Central won the meeting at the Shirk -- and that game was tied in the waning minutes -- the Sons of Warden would have finished tied atop the standings with the Titans and would have won a H2H tiebreaker.  We'd have been in Merner for the conference tournament.  And I don't think had that cadence of history taken place that Todd Raridon should have been coach of the year.  But that's what would have happened under the system currently in place.

[USee]

I don't know about 'clear cut'.  I think all of this proves exactly what AndOne suggested when he broached this subject initially -- an equally good case can be made for Ron Rose, Mike Schauer, or Matt Nadelhoffer.

The recruiting argument cuts both ways -- Ron Rose should get credit for doing a tremendous job of recruiting.  IWU is usually among the deepest teams in the league (and this year was a clear leader in that department).   And he's not just recruited great talent, but great talent that fits a specific style of play that he wants to put on the floor.  IWU has been lauded for being exceptionally unselfish this year -- he deserves significant credit for that.

But Matt Nadelhoffer should get credit for recruiting as well.  To say that the Millikin cupboard was barren of any useful parts would be an understatement.  He was starting from ground zero and had to convince kids to come into a program that (1) had bottomed out, (2) was not exactly in a desirable locale, and (3) was clearly going to take its lumps more often than not for the near future.  He had to, in essence, sell a vision rather than the present.  There was an interview earlier this year in which he said he told the kids he was recruiting last year (i.e. - this year's freshmen) specifically *not* to come watch Millikin play.  Ron Rose could show a recruit a beautiful modern arena with large crowds and a deep connection to both campus and community.  Matt Nadelhoffer basically had to say to his recruits 'trust me'.

So is the argument with the outcome?  No, if a vote of coaches placed Ron Rose at the top of the list I don't think anyone would have a reasonable argument against it.  But an equally compelling case could be made for select other coaches.

The argument is specifically with the process.  Look at it another way -- had North Central won the meeting at the Shirk -- and that game was tied in the waning minutes -- the Sons of Warden would have finished tied atop the standings with the Titans and would have won a H2H tiebreaker.  We'd have been in Merner for the conference tournament.  And I don't think had that cadence of history taken place that Todd Raridon should have been coach of the year.  But that's what would have happened under the system currently in place.

to your first point (bolded) I would say it isn't "an equally good case" because, of those three, only Rose won a conference championship. That speaks to Bob's point.

As to your scenario at the end of this post, I agree that is exactly the reason there should be some measure of subjectivity. In football, the CCIW champion has been COY every year for the last decade plus. The vote has done 2 things. 1-allowed coaches to split a tie for conference champion. Or 2- in the case of 2003 when Mike Swider was awarded COY for his conference championship, Paul Krohn from Elmhurst was a co-winner for guiding his team to a 6-4 record after being 3-7 or worse for 4 straight years.

I can see both sides of this but I do like the vote. For the winner, it is meaningful to be recognized by a vote of your peers.

[kiko]

My issue is primarily with the words "clear cut'.  Bob argues:

IWU, Wheaton, and Millikin all won 3 games more than what one might expect based on their positioning in the preseason coaches poll.  I guess I'm just saying, the issue of which team outperformed expectations the most is certainly debatable.  And if that's sort of a toss-up, don't you have to go with the coach that won the league, and finished 13-1?

This is where my perspective differs.  I don't necessarily think that you have to default to the conference winner and stronger record to separate close candidates.  I think it is perfectly reasonable to choose other criteria to break the tie.  You suggest this yourself in the example you give of the Elmhurst FB coach receiving co-honors for lifting his team to mid-table.   That is a pretty close analog to what Matt Nadelhoffer has done.

I think we're all arguing that we would prefer a vote to an automatic appointment.  And, if someone chooses Ron Rose, and points to the conference championship as the primary influencing factor in how they separated worthy candidates, I have zero issue with this.  But I don't think that necessarily has to be the default secondary criteria you look at.

[Gregory Sager]

I'm with you on this, Kiko. First of all, I think that we can all agree that COY shouldn't be an automatic process, and that it should be a peer-voted award. And I also think that, while the championship team's coach should be the winner most seasons, there are seasons when an exception to that trend is perfectly valid. This seems to me to be one of those seasons. An excellent case can be made for Ron Rose, and I certainly wouldn't argue that he doesn't deserve the award. But an excellent case can be made for Matt Nadelhoffer as well.

I disagree with Bob. I don't think that this is a clear-cut case for Rose at all.

[AndOne]

As a final thought on this subject, I'll just say i think it would be a shame if a coach whose team was picked to finish, lets say 6th, came in 2nd, and lost COY to a guy who was picked for and finished 1st just because of a "rule" saying the 1st place coach is automatically COY.
If, in this case the 1st place team went undefeated, then maybe that would merit that team's coach getting it or maybe a tie and a co-COY award.
Keep in mind I never said there is not a good argument for Coach Rose this year. I just thought Nadelhoffer and Schauer merited consideration, and an equally strong argument could be made in their behalf.

Bottom line is no matter who gets it, it shouldn't be an automatic award. I think the coaches are in the best position to judge who the COY is. And, as USee said, it would mean quite a bit to be recognized by a vote of your peers. 

[Titan Q]

I'm with you on this, Kiko. First of all, I think that we can all agree that COY shouldn't be an automatic process, and that it should be a peer-voted award. And I also think that, while the championship team's coach should be the winner most seasons, there are seasons when an exception to that trend is perfectly valid. This seems to me to be one of those seasons. An excellent case can be made for Ron Rose, and I certainly wouldn't argue that he doesn't deserve the award. But an excellent case can be made for Matt Nadelhoffer as well.

I disagree with Bob. I don't think that this is a clear-cut case for Rose at all.

I guess I just don't understand how it's not clear-cut, Greg.  Certainly Nadelhoffer has done an amazing job getting the Millikin program moving in the right direction.  But the Big Blue went 4-10 this year.  I know 4-10 is better than 0-14...but 4-10 is 4-10.

Ron Rose lost his entire perimeter group of players (3 starters, including 1st Team all-CCIW Brady Zimmer, and 3rd Team all-CCIW Eliud Gonzalez) from last year.  He plugged in new PG from the JV team (Dylan Overstreet), a transfer SG (Pat Sodemann), and shifted a PF reserve to play SF (Andrew Ziemnik).  He went on to go 13-1 in the CCIW, with an average margin of victory through 14 games of +16.6.  The margin per game is greater than any in the 12 years of stats on the CCIW website - http://www.cciw.org/sports/2010/5/26/MBB_0526102046.aspx?path=mbball.  Who knows how much farther back that goes back.  It's not like Rose returned his entire team, and it's not like IWU just barely squeaked by in winning the title.

I've been driving the bus this year for the Matt Nadelhoffer bandwagon - I am a huge fan of what he has done at Millikin - but what's the case for him over Rose for COY?

[D-3 watcher]

I agree, they should vote for it.
I don't agree that coach Nadelhoffer could or should have won it. As Q said, they won 4 conference games. Beating 4 very bad teams. While they were a lot better this year than last, 4 wins out of 14 games isn't coach of the year worthy.

[Titan Q]

I agree, they should vote for it.
I don't agree that coach Nadelhoffer could or should have won it. As Q said, they won 4 conference games. Beating 4 very bad teams. While they were a lot better this year than last, 4 wins out of 14 games isn't coach of the year worthy.

Right, Millikin beat North Park twice and Elmhurst once - both of those teams really, really struggled this year.  MU's other win was clearly their best - a home win vs Carthage.  But Carthage was just a 7-7 team.

I could see if Millikin went maybe 6-8, or 7-7, and had a couple good wins.  I guess I just don't see how a case can by made for Nadelhoffer at 4-10.

I think Matt Nadelhoffer's team will contend for a CCIW title as early as 2014-15, and again, I think he's done an amazing job.  But there has to be some level of success (beyond 4-10) attained to get into the COY conversation in my mind.

[Gregory Sager]

Bob, there's no need for me to reprise Kiko's post from 2:52 pm. He made the compelling argument in Nadelhoffer's favor, and I have nothing to add to it.

Again, I'm neither saying that Rose didn't deserve it or shouldn't have won it. I have no complaints on that score. But, like Kiko, I disagree that it's, to use your term, a clear-cut choice.

[iwu70]

Clear-cut, schmear-cut, Rose won it and 13-1 in this league is not chopped liver.  Let's move on, dear gentlemen.  It's first round time, and the Titans, not MU, are in the Dance at 21-5, 13-1.  It's showtime.   Good luck to NCC and WC in their big games too.   MU's time will perhaps come and we all wish Coach Nadelhoffer well.  He's done a great job so far, no doubt.  Perhaps they get to 8 wins in CCIW next year, if things continue to come together. 

And, does anyone here know if Zimmer is suiting up tonight?

I think the Titans win at home tonight, but it will be a close game, IMHO.

IWU70

P.S.  Seems WI-WW has already taken care of business in the "bracket of death."  WW awaits, hopefully, NCC. 

[veterancciwfan]

The last time IWU lost 2 consecutive home games was in Ron Rose's 3rd season (2008/09 when IWU went 13-12), losing to North Central and Elmhurst. The last time IWU lost 2 consecutive NCAA tournament games was split between the 03/04 Scott Trost team which lost the last game of the season at Wooster and the 04/05 team which lost to Hanover at Shirk.  In 30 years in the NCAA Div. 3 (1983/84 season through the 2012/2013 season), IWU has now appeared in 22 NCAA tournaments.

[D-3 watcher]

Zimmers statis is and has been the last 6-7 games, a game time decision. If his back will let him, he'll go. If anybody has had back issues, you can understand.

[Mr. Ypsi]

Zimmers statis is and has been the last 6-7 games, a game time decision. If his back will let him, he'll go. If anybody has had back issues, you can understand.

I saw Brady's big brother in Holland last spring.  After the win over UWSP, his grandfather and I agreed that Jordan was in such obvious pain that he could not possibly play against Hope (so I benched him on my fantasy team).  BIG mistake; Jordan merely had his best game of the entire tourney!

Brady's a Zimmer - he'll play!  (One difference: Jordan was a senior, so each game could be his last - and #1 Hope in Holland looked like it would probably be his last in any event.  But I've again got a Zimmer on my fantasy team, so he'd better play! )