MBB: College Conference of Illinois and Wisconsin

[Gregory Sager]

I have Elmhurst ahead of Benedictine right now and maybe not for good reason. Benedictine made a big move up my poll as I did a partial blowup, but I didn't swap the two. I might not have thought that through enough, but it crossed my mind. I have stated in the past that head-to-head doesn't always make a determination for me... but that doesn't mean it can't and in this case it probably should.

Go with your head, D-Mac ... don't just share your thoughts with us and then say "no" to your frontal lobe.

I am just nervous about Benedictine considering they only played CCIW opponents and Elmhurst is their top one while the rest (i.e. IWU, Wheaton, etc.) have turned out to be "average" (by their standards) so far this season.

Not true, Dave. Benedictine also beat North Central (in the airplane hangar, no less), and NCC is not average. The Cardinals are very good -- by my lights, edge-of-the-Top-25 good right now.

So with that thought in mind, I took a look at Benedictine's schedule and determined they only had one "significant" win (Elmhurst) and a number of a solid victories. I get nervous moving a team that wasn't even on my radar (let alone their own - this start I am pretty sure has surprised them) way up the poll in the first half of the season before they get into the meat of their conference schedule with not much more than one significant win. I've been burned on this before (NYU SMH).

Yeah, but that's NYU every year. Why you and other pollsters ever buy into the Shrinking Violets in the first place based upon gaudy but empty November and December results totally escapes me.

Nobody's saying that you have to give carte blanche on your ballot to any Tom, Dick, or Harry U that runs up a nice W-L before New Year's Day. I don't think that anybody but the most diehard fan really considers Lancaster Bible, Chapman, or Geneseo State to have a shot at Salem. (Although, as a thoroughgoing fan of underdogs, I'd love to be proven wrong about their chances. Wooster? Bo-ring. UWSP? Ho-hum. Amherst? Again? Lancaster Bible? Please, sir, I want some more!) But that's just it -- you can look at the teams that NYU plays every November and December and say to yourself on January 5th, "The Violets knocked over a bunch of tomato cans again, same as always. I'll wait until they hook up with Wash U and Emory and Chicago and Brandeis before I put them on my ballot." Benedictine isn't in that position, because the Bennies haven't been knocking over tomato cans. They've been beating quality non-conference teams -- and eviscerating the top half of the preseason poll in their own conference, as pointed out by sac.

However, you could make the same argument with Elmhurst to be sure. They don't have a major win on their resume so far, but my expectations for Elmhurst were already high and they are meeting those expectations. Yes, I understand the argument from many that previous years and preseason expectations shouldn't be what I lean on at this point in the season. That's a worthy argument, but Elmhurst was already high on my poll because I thought they were a very good team going in. Harder to argue they should move down the poll if I don't believe it... than it is to move Benedictine up the poll when they are surprising everyone.

I'm with Bob on this one. It's too late in the season to be relying upon preseason expectations and name-brand cachet. Everybody's got a body of work at this point that's extensive enough for any pollster to use primarily, if not exclusively, as his basis for judgment. (There's always a chance for an outlier here, in the sense that a team that was due to bring back a lot of proven talent from the year before may have gotten off to a slow start for roster reasons, perhaps due to players being injured, sick, missing due to grades, etc., but those players are expected to return.)

I've been in on this discussion many a time.  Eventually past seasons shouldn't matter, but I'm not entirely convinced that is true.  In 2006, I was 100% certain that IWU would beat Lawrence.  History.  For several years in a row I bemoaned the graduation losses of the IWU women as they were climbing the ladder.  I was sure it was doom and gloom with those seniors gone.  I FINALLY realized that one person didn't graduate: Mia Smith.  Bingo, national champs.

Chuck, I don't know if you realize this, but (in my eyes, at least) you keep undercutting your arguments by dragging your alma mater into them. I strongly suspect that you use discussions such as this as just another means to inject Illinois Wesleyan into the conversation. I could've maybe bought the idea that 2005-06 Lawrence and its sectional loss to the Titans was a valid comparison to 2015-16 Benedictine and its possible future, for the sake of argument if nothing else, but now you've dropped Mia Smith and the Illinois Wesleyan women's team into your trip down memory lane. Would you care to add any IWU opera-diva alumnae or IWU Chinese international students into the mix in order to make your "point"?

Sometimes with you and your old classmate I get the feeling that every conversational thread is a latent opportunity to play the CCIW version of Six Degrees of Kevin Bacon, as in, "How many connections will we have to make in order to bring the Titans into this topic?"

I've been in on this discussion many a time.  Eventually past seasons shouldn't matter, but I'm not entirely convinced that is true.  In 2006, I was 100% certain that IWU would beat Lawrence.  History. 

IWU beating Lawrence in 2006 had nothing to do with history, Chuck.  It had to do with IWU having better players in 2006 - namely 1st Team All-Americans Adam Dauksas ('06), Keelan Amelianovich ('06), and Zach Freeman ('07) - and the team finally coming together during the NCAA tournament.  The Titans, for whatever reason, really struggled in CCIW play and finished an incredibly disappointing 9-5.  When the tournament started, everything clicked. 

IWU was better than that great Lawrence team (and it was truly a great team - they could have won the national championship) and won a really tough road game.  The Titans were bigger and stronger at almost every position on the floor - I think IWU out-rebounded Lawrence by about 15.  History had absolutely nothing to do with what happened that night.

Those who are stuck on history are most likely not aware how talented the 2015-16 Benedictine team is.

This.

Stop comparing Benedictine to some team that hasn't existed for a decade now. Judge the Bennies on their own merits. And, most of all, watch their games if you really feel the need to compare them to anybody.

Just to make sure there isn't any confusion:

- When I talk about history, I am talking about program history and Mr. Ypsi nailed the reason: the head coach. If I have confidence or know the head coach can do some incredible things with the talent, I may give them the benefit of the doubt or at least rank them maybe a little higher. That happens across the board in all sports. Coaching is a major determining factor in Top 25s - it isn't all about the talent, but what you can or can't do with the talent or lack of talent in the cupboard.

You're apparently leading to something with this, D-Mac, but you're not willing to spell it out. Are you saying that John Baines, as specifically compared to Keith Bunkenburg, is part of your rationale for ranking Elmhurst ahead of Benedictine?

- I am not indicating I am still leaning on preseason expectations in any way shape or form. I am indiciating that Benedictine wasn't on my radar based on preseason thoughts and that Elmhurst was pretty high (maybe too high) based on preseason expectations. That has set-up a situation where bringing Elmhurst down and behind Benedictine hasn't won the argument based on where they began the season.
- I am looking at the current data and seeing the one thing that is different - a head to head win for Benedictine. But considering all the other data along with Elmhurst playing as expected and Benedictine playing way above expectations (they weren't even picked to win the conference by their own conference coaches!) doesn't mean I should swap them. That leads to further cons I may have for Benedictine one of which is: are they really for real? I want to see more on their resume in conference - against teams and coaches who know them the best especially the second time around during the season - before I am ready to buy more in.

Great thing about this week's Top 25? I can reconsider next week, and the following week, etc., etc., etc.

As the fan of not one but two up-and-coming D3 basketball programs, all I can do is sadly shake my head at this kind of thinking. It's an artificial obstacle that's being placed in the path of programs that have the results but not the résumé, as if the latter somehow trumps the former.

Benedictine was picked 2nd in the NACC.  The difference in that vote was two poll points, or two first place votes that went to Concordia(WI).  They have beaten the NACC preseason  #1 by 13, #3 by 28, #4 by 26, #6 by 22, to go with their 5-0 record vs the CCIW, 3 of those on the road.

Benedictine was 18-9 last year, they tied for the conference championship.

Yes! Exactly!

A team overlooked, yes. 

A team fighting brand-name bias ... and losing the battle with at least one pollster in one specific head-to-head instance.

[AndOne]

The thing is, Benedictine should not have been overlooked. Anyone looking at them in the pre-season, with their eyes open, should have realized that 4 of last year's 5 starters were returning, plus they were being joined by a future NBA player. 

[markerickson]

I can't access the live stream from Carthage.  Anyone having success?

[Gregory Sager]

What are you trying to watch, Mark? Today's Tuesday, not Wednesday.

[veterancciwfan]

2 thoughts: Elmhurst is legit and John Baines and his team cleverly and expertly found holes in IWU's 3-2 zone with long skip passes to an open man, usually in the opposite corner. What a difference 20 years makes dept: In January 1996 at Shirk before the all-time largest crowd of 3,500, 2 undefeated teams played and IWU squeaked out a one point win over the (then) Crusaders. Twenty years later, IWU (6-6) meets Wheaton (4-8) tomorrow. Make it 3 thoughts: How tough is the CCIW year in and year out? Use the 95/96 season as an example. IWU finished 28-3 and 3rd at Salem and many consider that team better than the 96/97 national champions, but Wheaton was the CCIW champ, going 13-1 while IWU finished 2nd at 12-2. 

[markerickson]

My bad.  Thanks, Greg.  In my defense, hack hack, I stayed home today due to illness, am not fully alert, and had to go to bed before the OU/KS game ended last night.

[joehakes]

I have Elmhurst ahead of Benedictine right now and maybe not for good reason. Benedictine made a big move up my poll as I did a partial blowup, but I didn't swap the two. I might not have thought that through enough, but it crossed my mind. I have stated in the past that head-to-head doesn't always make a determination for me... but that doesn't mean it can't and in this case it probably should.

Go with your head, D-Mac ... don't just share your thoughts with us and then say "no" to your frontal lobe.

I am just nervous about Benedictine considering they only played CCIW opponents and Elmhurst is their top one while the rest (i.e. IWU, Wheaton, etc.) have turned out to be "average" (by their standards) so far this season.

Not true, Dave. Benedictine also beat North Central (in the airplane hangar, no less), and NCC is not average. The Cardinals are very good -- by my lights, edge-of-the-Top-25 good right now.

So with that thought in mind, I took a look at Benedictine's schedule and determined they only had one "significant" win (Elmhurst) and a number of a solid victories. I get nervous moving a team that wasn't even on my radar (let alone their own - this start I am pretty sure has surprised them) way up the poll in the first half of the season before they get into the meat of their conference schedule with not much more than one significant win. I've been burned on this before (NYU SMH).

Yeah, but that's NYU every year. Why you and other pollsters ever buy into the Shrinking Violets in the first place based upon gaudy but empty November and December results totally escapes me.

Nobody's saying that you have to give carte blanche on your ballot to any Tom, Dick, or Harry U that runs up a nice W-L before New Year's Day. I don't think that anybody but the most diehard fan really considers Lancaster Bible, Chapman, or Geneseo State to have a shot at Salem. (Although, as a thoroughgoing fan of underdogs, I'd love to be proven wrong about their chances. Wooster? Bo-ring. UWSP? Ho-hum. Amherst? Again? Lancaster Bible? Please, sir, I want some more!) But that's just it -- you can look at the teams that NYU plays every November and December and say to yourself on January 5th, "The Violets knocked over a bunch of tomato cans again, same as always. I'll wait until they hook up with Wash U and Emory and Chicago and Brandeis before I put them on my ballot." Benedictine isn't in that position, because the Bennies haven't been knocking over tomato cans. They've been beating quality non-conference teams -- and eviscerating the top half of the preseason poll in their own conference, as pointed out by sac.

However, you could make the same argument with Elmhurst to be sure. They don't have a major win on their resume so far, but my expectations for Elmhurst were already high and they are meeting those expectations. Yes, I understand the argument from many that previous years and preseason expectations shouldn't be what I lean on at this point in the season. That's a worthy argument, but Elmhurst was already high on my poll because I thought they were a very good team going in. Harder to argue they should move down the poll if I don't believe it... than it is to move Benedictine up the poll when they are surprising everyone.

I'm with Bob on this one. It's too late in the season to be relying upon preseason expectations and name-brand cachet. Everybody's got a body of work at this point that's extensive enough for any pollster to use primarily, if not exclusively, as his basis for judgment. (There's always a chance for an outlier here, in the sense that a team that was due to bring back a lot of proven talent from the year before may have gotten off to a slow start for roster reasons, perhaps due to players being injured, sick, missing due to grades, etc., but those players are expected to return.)

I've been in on this discussion many a time.  Eventually past seasons shouldn't matter, but I'm not entirely convinced that is true.  In 2006, I was 100% certain that IWU would beat Lawrence.  History.  For several years in a row I bemoaned the graduation losses of the IWU women as they were climbing the ladder.  I was sure it was doom and gloom with those seniors gone.  I FINALLY realized that one person didn't graduate: Mia Smith.  Bingo, national champs.

Chuck, I don't know if you realize this, but (in my eyes, at least) you keep undercutting your arguments by dragging your alma mater into them. I strongly suspect that you use discussions such as this as just another means to inject Illinois Wesleyan into the conversation. I could've maybe bought the idea that 2005-06 Lawrence and its sectional loss to the Titans was a valid comparison to 2015-16 Benedictine and its possible future, for the sake of argument if nothing else, but now you've dropped Mia Smith and the Illinois Wesleyan women's team into your trip down memory lane. Would you care to add any IWU opera-diva alumnae or IWU Chinese international students into the mix in order to make your "point"?

Sometimes with you and your old classmate I get the feeling that every conversational thread is a latent opportunity to play the CCIW version of Six Degrees of Kevin Bacon, as in, "How many connections will we have to make in order to bring the Titans into this topic?"

I've been in on this discussion many a time.  Eventually past seasons shouldn't matter, but I'm not entirely convinced that is true.  In 2006, I was 100% certain that IWU would beat Lawrence.  History. 

IWU beating Lawrence in 2006 had nothing to do with history, Chuck.  It had to do with IWU having better players in 2006 - namely 1st Team All-Americans Adam Dauksas ('06), Keelan Amelianovich ('06), and Zach Freeman ('07) - and the team finally coming together during the NCAA tournament.  The Titans, for whatever reason, really struggled in CCIW play and finished an incredibly disappointing 9-5.  When the tournament started, everything clicked. 

IWU was better than that great Lawrence team (and it was truly a great team - they could have won the national championship) and won a really tough road game.  The Titans were bigger and stronger at almost every position on the floor - I think IWU out-rebounded Lawrence by about 15.  History had absolutely nothing to do with what happened that night.

Those who are stuck on history are most likely not aware how talented the 2015-16 Benedictine team is.

This.

Stop comparing Benedictine to some team that hasn't existed for a decade now. Judge the Bennies on their own merits. And, most of all, watch their games if you really feel the need to compare them to anybody.

Just to make sure there isn't any confusion:

- When I talk about history, I am talking about program history and Mr. Ypsi nailed the reason: the head coach. If I have confidence or know the head coach can do some incredible things with the talent, I may give them the benefit of the doubt or at least rank them maybe a little higher. That happens across the board in all sports. Coaching is a major determining factor in Top 25s - it isn't all about the talent, but what you can or can't do with the talent or lack of talent in the cupboard.

You're apparently leading to something with this, D-Mac, but you're not willing to spell it out. Are you saying that John Baines, as specifically compared to Keith Bunkenburg, is part of your rationale for ranking Elmhurst ahead of Benedictine?

- I am not indicating I am still leaning on preseason expectations in any way shape or form. I am indiciating that Benedictine wasn't on my radar based on preseason thoughts and that Elmhurst was pretty high (maybe too high) based on preseason expectations. That has set-up a situation where bringing Elmhurst down and behind Benedictine hasn't won the argument based on where they began the season.
- I am looking at the current data and seeing the one thing that is different - a head to head win for Benedictine. But considering all the other data along with Elmhurst playing as expected and Benedictine playing way above expectations (they weren't even picked to win the conference by their own conference coaches!) doesn't mean I should swap them. That leads to further cons I may have for Benedictine one of which is: are they really for real? I want to see more on their resume in conference - against teams and coaches who know them the best especially the second time around during the season - before I am ready to buy more in.

Great thing about this week's Top 25? I can reconsider next week, and the following week, etc., etc., etc.

As the fan of not one but two up-and-coming D3 basketball programs, all I can do is sadly shake my head at this kind of thinking. It's an artificial obstacle that's being placed in the path of programs that have the results but not the résumé, as if the latter somehow trumps the former.

Benedictine was picked 2nd in the NACC.  The difference in that vote was two poll points, or two first place votes that went to Concordia(WI).  They have beaten the NACC preseason  #1 by 13, #3 by 28, #4 by 26, #6 by 22, to go with their 5-0 record vs the CCIW, 3 of those on the road.

Benedictine was 18-9 last year, they tied for the conference championship.

Yes! Exactly!

A team overlooked, yes. 

A team fighting brand-name bias ... and losing the battle with at least one pollster in one specific head-to-head instance.

This post should be in the Hall of Fame for d3hoops.com epistles.  Greg dismisses more opinions in this than any post in history.  And he hits the nail on the head every time.

Six degrees of separation for Ypsi would be a welcome rest for everyone and I wish you hadn't planted the IWU opera seed in his head.

Polls should have nothing to do with happened outside of the current season after a pre-season throw-it-at-the-wall-to-see-what-sticks and the inclusion of one's opinion on subjective comparisons of coaches' historical abilities really shouldn't come into play. As Greg says, don't blame or reward current players for what their school did or didn't do ten years ago.  (Or in the case of IWU and Travis Grant several decades ago.). 

[Gregory Sager]

My bad.  Thanks, Greg.  In my defense, hack hack, I stayed home today due to illness, am not fully alert, and had to go to bed before the OU/KS game ended last night.

That's OK, Mark. It's probably happened to all of us at one time or another!

[kiko]

Worth pointing out: none of the folks making a stink about this are Benedictine homers, and they're all advocating against a team from their own conference.

If the H2H result were, say, a three point game, then ignoring it would be a reasonable argument.  But Benedictine led that game, on the road, by 28 at halftime and by 20 with 10 minutes to go.  Ignoring that is more or less saying that reputation matters more than reality.

[iwu70]

I'm staying out of all this -- just over here in Hong Kong listening to Dawn Upshaw CDs and prowling around Mongkok Government Stadium for the next Yao Ming recruit for IWU.  It can't be Wednesday soon enough in my book.

I still have BU over EC, all on the basis of what they have done THIS YEAR.

IWU'70

[iwumichigander]

I have Elmhurst ahead of Benedictine right now and maybe not for good reason. Benedictine made a big move up my poll as I did a partial blowup, but I didn't swap the two. I might not have thought that through enough, but it crossed my mind. I have stated in the past that head-to-head doesn't always make a determination for me... but that doesn't mean it can't and in this case it probably should.

Go with your head, D-Mac ... don't just share your thoughts with us and then say "no" to your frontal lobe.

I am just nervous about Benedictine considering they only played CCIW opponents and Elmhurst is their top one while the rest (i.e. IWU, Wheaton, etc.) have turned out to be "average" (by their standards) so far this season.

Not true, Dave. Benedictine also beat North Central (in the airplane hangar, no less), and NCC is not average. The Cardinals are very good -- by my lights, edge-of-the-Top-25 good right now.

So with that thought in mind, I took a look at Benedictine's schedule and determined they only had one "significant" win (Elmhurst) and a number of a solid victories. I get nervous moving a team that wasn't even on my radar (let alone their own - this start I am pretty sure has surprised them) way up the poll in the first half of the season before they get into the meat of their conference schedule with not much more than one significant win. I've been burned on this before (NYU SMH).

Yeah, but that's NYU every year. Why you and other pollsters ever buy into the Shrinking Violets in the first place based upon gaudy but empty November and December results totally escapes me.

Nobody's saying that you have to give carte blanche on your ballot to any Tom, Dick, or Harry U that runs up a nice W-L before New Year's Day. I don't think that anybody but the most diehard fan really considers Lancaster Bible, Chapman, or Geneseo State to have a shot at Salem. (Although, as a thoroughgoing fan of underdogs, I'd love to be proven wrong about their chances. Wooster? Bo-ring. UWSP? Ho-hum. Amherst? Again? Lancaster Bible? Please, sir, I want some more!) But that's just it -- you can look at the teams that NYU plays every November and December and say to yourself on January 5th, "The Violets knocked over a bunch of tomato cans again, same as always. I'll wait until they hook up with Wash U and Emory and Chicago and Brandeis before I put them on my ballot." Benedictine isn't in that position, because the Bennies haven't been knocking over tomato cans. They've been beating quality non-conference teams -- and eviscerating the top half of the preseason poll in their own conference, as pointed out by sac.

However, you could make the same argument with Elmhurst to be sure. They don't have a major win on their resume so far, but my expectations for Elmhurst were already high and they are meeting those expectations. Yes, I understand the argument from many that previous years and preseason expectations shouldn't be what I lean on at this point in the season. That's a worthy argument, but Elmhurst was already high on my poll because I thought they were a very good team going in. Harder to argue they should move down the poll if I don't believe it... than it is to move Benedictine up the poll when they are surprising everyone.

I'm with Bob on this one. It's too late in the season to be relying upon preseason expectations and name-brand cachet. Everybody's got a body of work at this point that's extensive enough for any pollster to use primarily, if not exclusively, as his basis for judgment. (There's always a chance for an outlier here, in the sense that a team that was due to bring back a lot of proven talent from the year before may have gotten off to a slow start for roster reasons, perhaps due to players being injured, sick, missing due to grades, etc., but those players are expected to return.)

I've been in on this discussion many a time.  Eventually past seasons shouldn't matter, but I'm not entirely convinced that is true.  In 2006, I was 100% certain that IWU would beat Lawrence.  History.  For several years in a row I bemoaned the graduation losses of the IWU women as they were climbing the ladder.  I was sure it was doom and gloom with those seniors gone.  I FINALLY realized that one person didn't graduate: Mia Smith.  Bingo, national champs.

Chuck, I don't know if you realize this, but (in my eyes, at least) you keep undercutting your arguments by dragging your alma mater into them. I strongly suspect that you use discussions such as this as just another means to inject Illinois Wesleyan into the conversation. I could've maybe bought the idea that 2005-06 Lawrence and its sectional loss to the Titans was a valid comparison to 2015-16 Benedictine and its possible future, for the sake of argument if nothing else, but now you've dropped Mia Smith and the Illinois Wesleyan women's team into your trip down memory lane. Would you care to add any IWU opera-diva alumnae or IWU Chinese international students into the mix in order to make your "point"?

Sometimes with you and your old classmate I get the feeling that every conversational thread is a latent opportunity to play the CCIW version of Six Degrees of Kevin Bacon, as in, "How many connections will we have to make in order to bring the Titans into this topic?"

I've been in on this discussion many a time.  Eventually past seasons shouldn't matter, but I'm not entirely convinced that is true.  In 2006, I was 100% certain that IWU would beat Lawrence.  History. 

IWU beating Lawrence in 2006 had nothing to do with history, Chuck.  It had to do with IWU having better players in 2006 - namely 1st Team All-Americans Adam Dauksas ('06), Keelan Amelianovich ('06), and Zach Freeman ('07) - and the team finally coming together during the NCAA tournament.  The Titans, for whatever reason, really struggled in CCIW play and finished an incredibly disappointing 9-5.  When the tournament started, everything clicked. 

IWU was better than that great Lawrence team (and it was truly a great team - they could have won the national championship) and won a really tough road game.  The Titans were bigger and stronger at almost every position on the floor - I think IWU out-rebounded Lawrence by about 15.  History had absolutely nothing to do with what happened that night.

Those who are stuck on history are most likely not aware how talented the 2015-16 Benedictine team is.

This.

Stop comparing Benedictine to some team that hasn't existed for a decade now. Judge the Bennies on their own merits. And, most of all, watch their games if you really feel the need to compare them to anybody.

Just to make sure there isn't any confusion:

- When I talk about history, I am talking about program history and Mr. Ypsi nailed the reason: the head coach. If I have confidence or know the head coach can do some incredible things with the talent, I may give them the benefit of the doubt or at least rank them maybe a little higher. That happens across the board in all sports. Coaching is a major determining factor in Top 25s - it isn't all about the talent, but what you can or can't do with the talent or lack of talent in the cupboard.

You're apparently leading to something with this, D-Mac, but you're not willing to spell it out. Are you saying that John Baines, as specifically compared to Keith Bunkenburg, is part of your rationale for ranking Elmhurst ahead of Benedictine?

- I am not indicating I am still leaning on preseason expectations in any way shape or form. I am indiciating that Benedictine wasn't on my radar based on preseason thoughts and that Elmhurst was pretty high (maybe too high) based on preseason expectations. That has set-up a situation where bringing Elmhurst down and behind Benedictine hasn't won the argument based on where they began the season.
- I am looking at the current data and seeing the one thing that is different - a head to head win for Benedictine. But considering all the other data along with Elmhurst playing as expected and Benedictine playing way above expectations (they weren't even picked to win the conference by their own conference coaches!) doesn't mean I should swap them. That leads to further cons I may have for Benedictine one of which is: are they really for real? I want to see more on their resume in conference - against teams and coaches who know them the best especially the second time around during the season - before I am ready to buy more in.

Great thing about this week's Top 25? I can reconsider next week, and the following week, etc., etc., etc.

As the fan of not one but two up-and-coming D3 basketball programs, all I can do is sadly shake my head at this kind of thinking. It's an artificial obstacle that's being placed in the path of programs that have the results but not the résumé, as if the latter somehow trumps the former.

Benedictine was picked 2nd in the NACC.  The difference in that vote was two poll points, or two first place votes that went to Concordia(WI).  They have beaten the NACC preseason  #1 by 13, #3 by 28, #4 by 26, #6 by 22, to go with their 5-0 record vs the CCIW, 3 of those on the road.

Benedictine was 18-9 last year, they tied for the conference championship.

Yes! Exactly!

A team overlooked, yes. 

A team fighting brand-name bias ... and losing the battle with at least one pollster in one specific head-to-head instance.

This post should be in the Hall of Fame for d3hoops.com epistles.  Greg dismisses more opinions in this than any post in history.  And he hits the nail on the head every time.

Six degrees of separation for Ypsi would be a welcome rest for everyone and I wish you hadn't planted the IWU opera seed in his head.

Polls should have nothing to do with happened outside of the current season after a pre-season throw-it-at-the-wall-to-see-what-sticks and the inclusion of one's opinion on subjective comparisons of coaches' historical abilities really shouldn't come into play. As Greg says, don't blame or reward current players for what their school did or didn't do ten years ago.  (Or in the case of IWU and Travis Grant several decades ago.). 

Oh gee, you do not want to get Ypsi or IWU70 started on the School of Music or School of Drama and Fine Arts with their long list of outstanding actors, performers and artists!

[Gregory Sager]

This post should be in the Hall of Fame for d3hoops.com epistles.  Greg dismisses more opinions in this than any post in history.  And he hits the nail on the head every time.

Six degrees of separation for Ypsi would be a welcome rest for everyone and I wish you hadn't planted the IWU opera seed in his head.

Polls should have nothing to do with happened outside of the current season after a pre-season throw-it-at-the-wall-to-see-what-sticks and the inclusion of one's opinion on subjective comparisons of coaches' historical abilities really shouldn't come into play. As Greg says, don't blame or reward current players for what their school did or didn't do ten years ago.  (Or in the case of IWU and Travis Grant several decades ago.). 

Thanks, Joe. But, alas, my work is never done. To wit:

What a difference 20 years makes dept:

That's a "department" now?

Moreover, why go back twenty years? That's a lifetime ago as far as college basketball is concerned. What's wrong with "what a difference three years makes"? Three years ago Elmhurst went 6-19, 2-12, and now the 'jays are a Top Ten power. Three years ago North Park went 6-19, 1-13, and now NPU is universally considered to be a legit first-division contender, with two of the top four or five players in the league. Three years ago Augie was a mediocre 8-6 in the league, finishing five games out of first place, and now the question doesn't seem to be whether or not Augie will win the league as much as whether it will lose either one or two (or maybe even none, if you're Chuck) league games on the way to getting the trophy handed to them by CCIW commish Chris Martin.

So why the heck are you setting the dial back two whole decades on the WABAC machine? Maybe instead you should just set up a Flickr account for your Salem pictures and post a link for it here.

In January 1996 at Shirk before the all-time largest crowd of 3,500, 2 undefeated teams played and IWU squeaked out a one point win over the (then) Crusaders. Twenty years later, IWU (6-6) meets Wheaton (4-8) tomorrow. Make it 3 thoughts: How tough is the CCIW year in and year out? Use the 95/96 season as an example. IWU finished 28-3 and 3rd at Salem and many consider that team better than the 96/97 national champions, but Wheaton was the CCIW champ, going 13-1 while IWU finished 2nd at 12-2. 

Give me a break, Lanny. The 1995-96 season was not an example of the CCIW's toughness. Rather, your citation of that particular year is a classic example of your green-colored selective memory. Have you ever looked at the W-L records for that season? The CCIW as a whole went 53-41 (.564) in non-conference play, and that's factoring in Wesleyan's Final Four run. In terms of the regular season only, the CCIW had a seriously earthbound .547 winning percentage. The lower half of the league stunk like days-old roadkill in 1995-96, as four -- count 'em, four -- CCIW teams lost more than two out of every three games that they played overall, with Carthage and North Central each paving the way with 20-loss seasons.

Nobody's trying to stop you from taking happy jaunts back to yesteryear when men were bold, hearts were glad, and everybody bowed and scraped before the Titans. But if you're going to rewrite league history in the process ... well, sorry, but not on my watch, sir.

Oh gee, you do not want to get Ypsi or IWU70 started on the School of Music or School of Drama and Fine Arts with their long list of outstanding actors, performers and artists!

Naaah! They wouldn't dare do such a thing right before a game night!

(Would they?)

I'm staying out of all this -- just over here in Hong Kong listening to Dawn Upshaw CDs and prowling around Mongkok Government Stadium for the next Yao Ming recruit for IWU.

Better be careful, Mark. Rumor has it that Monguk Government Stadium has a picture of you posted in the stadium security office:

[Dave 'd-mac' McHugh]

SMH... I don't have the time to respond to everything Greg. You can read my blog tomorrow since it took most of the day to put together and I am already well past my device-curfew for the night (doctor enforced). However, I do want to say one thing... I am NOT ranking teams based on what they did last year or ten years ago. If you read what I am saying and make that connection I can't help you. I am voting based on this year. My point that I have tried to make whether successfully or not... is to say that there is one factor involved in voting for the teams that is consistent and that's coaching. And that does have some past associated with it. Am I looking at an IWU team and the players on the floor and comparing them to a squad from ten years ago? Hell no. Am I looking at the coaching leading the way for Augustana and comparing what I have seen him do over the course of the last ten years? Yes! What the hell is wrong with that small part of the entire process? What is wrong with looking at a team and debating how a coach is successful or not as part of considering how good they are or could be with the talent they have in place right now?

Augustana is number one because they brought back everyone from last year and have a coach who clearly has found a system and style that is succeeding very well in Rock Island. They have remained number one because that talent continues to win and the coach has made the necessary adjustments in game and out to keep them on the right track.

Elmhurst was ranked pretty high because they brought back a team that was pretty darn good last season along with a coach who clearly has shown he has a grasp of things (in just three years) at the school and has been pointing the ship in this direction for a few years. They remain high in the rankings because they have taken a loss and not let it affect them and gotten strong in the process.

Benedictine started off completely off the map in the preseason thanks to finishing 18-9 (certainly an improvement), in a conference that usually doesn't provide much of a national contender, and not in the NCAA tournament and hasn't been a serious Top 25 conversation participant in a number of years. They have steadily moved up my ballot into the Top 15 in mid-December thanks to the fact they keep winning. They leap-frogged into number nine this week (I haven't released my ballot, yet), because they are still undefeated and they did beat North Central (I skipped over it here earlier, but I mention in my blog that North Central early on didn't look like much of a team, but has developed into a team certainly in the Top 25 conversation as of late). However, Benedictine has been all over the map under the direction of Coach Bunkenburg and thus when I am trying to understand what direction they are truly headed in and what kind of season they could have ... it is hard when there is nothing consistent from Bunkenburg's program over the years. THAT'S what I look at when I talk about the past and coaches. Not the fact that Player A is like Player B from ten years ago - that's just good for conversation, not Top 25 voting.

I am voting on what is going on now, but if you think for one moment I am going to ignore the man in charge of the program and the consistencies or inconsistencies he has shown in his tenure and career, you are nuts. I have every right to consider that part of understanding and breaking down a team. Duke doesn't get the love they get if not for Coach K. If you don't understand my point on this fine, but don't take my words and say I am voting for teams based on how the PLAYERS did ten years ago. That isn't what I mean or what I am doing.

Which actually segues nicely into NYU. If you have read any of my blogs in the past and if you have read any of my posts per NYU on these boards this season (especially in the Top 25 thread and most recently in the SUNYAC thread), you will know I am actually NOT voting for NYU. The reason I brought them up was that years ago, I did buy into them in the first half of the season and they disappeared off my ballot within three weekends of UAA action. I learned my lesson. I now raise the bar for their out-of-conference record before I go anywhere near them. I have stated on these boards that I don't at all understand why voters are buying into NYU. They have one good win (Arcadia) and a bunch of wasted games. Their OOWP is horrible - throw out Arcadia and it's horrific. That last time voting for NYU in the first half was YEARS ago... I can't remember how long ago. Never since.

I did vote for NYU last season in late January after seeing them in person when they dismantled Wash U at their place. They were a different team and I thought they were on the verge of turning the UAA on it's head - it kind of did turn on it's head, but not with as much influence from NYU as I had thought. But there is an example of a coach and his tendencies over the years and understanding that NYU isn't as good as it's out-of-conference record every indicates. Interestingly enough, that is a perfect case of using a program's past to understand it's current situation. NYU has a gaudy record, but I know from the past that it has been usually hogwash. So I don't buy in just because they only have one loss. I do my work, do my research, and make sure I understand who teams are playing. NYU doesn't past the smell test accordingly.

You can read my blog tomorrow - when I get it posted probably midday (it's written, I just need to dress it up).

[kiko]

SMH... I don't have the time to respond to everything Greg. You can read my blog tomorrow since it took most of the day to put together and I am already well past my device-curfew for the night (doctor enforced). However, I do want to say one thing... I am NOT ranking teams based on what they did last year or ten years ago. If you read what I am saying and make that connection I can't help you. I am voting based on this year. My point that I have tried to make whether successfully or not... is to say that there is one factor involved in voting for the teams that is consistent and that's coaching. And that does have some past associated with it. Am I looking at an IWU team and the players on the floor and comparing them to a squad from ten years ago? Hell no. Am I looking at the coaching leading the way for Augustana and comparing what I have seen him do over the course of the last ten years? Yes! What the hell is wrong with that small part of the entire process? What is wrong with looking at a team and debating how a coach is successful or not as part of considering how good they are or could be with the talent they have in place right now?

This year, Benedictine blew out Elmhurst.  And, red herrings about NYU aside, it does not appear to be an outlier.

If you are ranking Elmhurst above Benedictine because Elmhurst "brought back a team that was pretty darn good last season along with a coach who clearly has shown he has a grasp of things", and Benedictine "has been all over the map under the direction of Coach Bunkenburg and thus when I am trying to understand what direction they are truly headed in", then you are, in fact, not basing your vote on this year.  You can tell yourself that you are, but the combination of this rationale and dismissing the rather decisive results from an actual game played on an actual court during this season explicitly says that reputation and 2014-15 factors more into your vote than 2015-16.

[iwu70]

No, Greg, that would be pictures of the booksellers, guys selling books banned in China, now detained on the mainland, perhaps even grabbed up in Hong Kong or Thailand.  Believe me, we have much more to worry about here than whether BU or EC is ranked higher or lower in the latest poll. 

'70 on the Far Side.