MBB: College Conference of Illinois and Wisconsin

[kiko]

Many teams will have to win the AQ to get into the Dance, otherwise, likely only one team in from the CCIW this year.

That's just not true, Mark. Right now there are two CCIW teams that are well situated for Pool C consideration. Granted, one isn't playing well at the moment, and there's an entire round-robin left for the league to knock either or both of those two teams down to the Land of Bubble, or worse, but your statement contradicts the current numbers.

These posts from the Pool C room add some perspective:

IN THE CENTRAL REGION...

Halfway through the double round-robin and the CCIW is killing themselves. Could they just be a two-bid league???

Augustana   7-1   14-3
North Park   6-2   13-4
Carroll   5-3   10-7
Carthage   4-4   11-6
Illinois Wesleyan   4-4   12-5


8 more games to play in the WIAC double round-robin as well.

UW-River Falls   6-0   16-1
UW-Oshkosh   3-3   10-7
UW-Eau Claire   3-3   13-4
UW-Stout   3-3   12-5
UW-Whitewater   3-3   14-3

I don't think either team's SOS is gonna get the MWC a Pool C bid.

St. Norbert   9-1   12-3
Ripon   8-2   12-3

The NACC and the SLIAC are 1-bid leagues, unless Benedictine loses in the conference tourney.

I was actually looking at the CCIW earlier today and thinking the same thing.  IF IWU duplicates their second half round-robin the same as the first they'll be out of range for a Pool C bid.  They likely have to go 6-2 with their 8th loss coming in the CCIW tournament.  No guarantee of that.

But I can also see a weird scenario where 4 teams starts to look like a possibility.

2011 was the last time the CCIW didn't get 3 in the tournament.

The cut-and-paste post here buries an important consideration.  A number of CCIW teams look to be bubblish from a Pool C standpoint -- somewhere in the 7-8 loss range is usually when it is time to sweat, and if you are already counting 5 or more losses, you are starting to eat into your cushion.

Normally carrying that many losses would be a bit problematic in this region as there would be a couple of WIAC teams lined up above a 7- or 8-loss CCIW team in the final regional rankings.  This would push the second tier(*) CCIW team lower in the pecking order and would get them to the table later.  But with the WIAC also suffering a bit from everyone-can-beat-anyone this year, this dynamic may look different.  It will be interesting to watch where the second wave of CCIW and WIAC schools land in the regional rankings.  With both conferences underwhelming this year, where the CCIW schools land relative to the WIAC schools will be important.  There may be a little more forgiveness in the regional rankings for teams carrying higher number of losses if they land favorable compared to the hyphens.

That said, neither Carthage, nor Carroll, nor Illinois Wesleyan, nor even North Park the way the Vikings have performed of late should be thinking about March just yet.

(*) - Second tier as in "the tier below the current conference leaders"... not as in "second-rate".

[AndOne]

Do you guys think the NCAA/CCIW would accept a letter from Andone in lieu of an actual M.D. if Raridon wants a hardship year?

My letter is already in route to NCAA headquarters with a duplicate to the CCIW office.
I also attached a copy of the certificate from the American University of the Caribbean
School of Medicine attesting to the fact that my medical "degree" is valid in all 50 states,
the District of Columbia, and all U.S. territories. 💼 💉 😉

Is that a satellite campus of the Augie Medical School? 🤔😉

Yes, it's the campus where Luke Scarlata is now Chief of Surgery after attending the Augie Medical School, of which Scarlata became aware during Stomper Giovanine's recruiting pitch. 😏 🤒 😎

Wow!  I think your Luke Scarlatta reference trumps my Marc Horner reference. Nicely done Andone.

Nah, 4samuy, you win the prize based upon age of reference. Can you believe it'll be a quarter-century this coming May since Horner graduated?

Besides, we have to give Pete credit for the Scarlata reference, since he alluded to it first with that "Augie Medical School" remark.

Thanks 4samuy. I appreciate it.

Even though I evidently don't deserve any credit because I wasn't around 25 years ago and never heard of Horner, and everyone knew Pete meant Scarlata even though he didn't name him. 🤖

[Gregory Sager]

Why are you complaining, Mark? Life is good for you. After all, you're now making the big money as a newly-minted orthopedist.

[AndOne]

An advantage that IWU will apparently enjoy in the 2nd half of the conference season, that they did not have in the first half, is that they will apparently get to face a Connor Raridonless NCC squad in the 2nd round. Among the current top 5 conference teams, only Carthage had to face Raridon in the 1st round although the Bosko Boys didn't need any extra help that night.

[AndOne]

Why are you complaining, Mark? Life is good for you. After all, you're now making the big money as a newly-minted orthopedist.

Actually, rather than being "newly-minted," I earned my medical degree through correspondence courses a few years ago before retiring from my position as a medical fraud investigator. 💼 🤒 😎
It's only in the last few years that I've been practicing on a more full time basis, so most of that big money you referenced is still going toward loan repayments. 

[4samuy]

Do you guys think the NCAA/CCIW would accept a letter from Andone in lieu of an actual M.D. if Raridon wants a hardship year?

My letter is already in route to NCAA headquarters with a duplicate to the CCIW office.
I also attached a copy of the certificate from the American University of the Caribbean
School of Medicine attesting to the fact that my medical "degree" is valid in all 50 states,
the District of Columbia, and all U.S. territories. 💼 💉 😉

Is that a satellite campus of the Augie Medical School? 🤔😉

Yes, it's the campus where Luke Scarlata is now Chief of Surgery after attending the Augie Medical School, of which Scarlata became aware during Stomper Giovanine's recruiting pitch. 😏 🤒 😎

Wow!  I think your Luke Scarlatta reference trumps my Marc Horner reference. Nicely done Andone.

Nah, 4samuy, you win the prize based upon age of reference. Can you believe it'll be a quarter-century this coming May since Horner graduated?

Besides, we have to give Pete credit for the Scarlata reference, since he alluded to it first with that "Augie Medical School" remark.

Thanks 4samuy. I appreciate it.

Even though I evidently don't deserve any credit because I wasn't around 25 years ago and never heard of Horner, and everyone knew Pete meant Scarlata even though he didn't name him. 🤖

Understand. I just had to slip Horners name in, not only because he was great player at NPU, but also because I played some rec ball with both he and his fellow mate Jeff Pearson (who I'm sure Greg also has some remembrances of).

[AndOne]

Water under the bridge at this point 4samuy. And, I'm sure Greg would remember him too. 

[Gregory Sager]

Water under the bridge at this point 4samuy. And, I'm sure Greg would remember him too. 

Jeff Pearson? He's not only been a friend of mine for the better part of thirty years, he's also a CCIW ref -- so he's still very much a presence in this league. (I don't think he's done any varsity CCIW games this season, though; he's done a lot of NACC games in 2016-17.)

[iwumichigander]

An advantage that IWU will apparently enjoy in the 2nd half of the conference season, that they did not have in the first half, is that they will apparently get to face a Connor Raridonless NCC squad in the 2nd round. Among the current top 5 conference teams, only Carthage had to face Raridon in the 1st round although the Bosko Boys didn't need any extra help that night.

IWU faced a Connor Raridonless NNC squad in the first half.  However , Connor Raridon did play although we would have been happy if he played less

[Dave 'd-mac' McHugh]

Ypsi, as we all expected.  Any game, esp. road games, in the CCIW is tough.  Many teams will have to win the AQ to get into the Dance, otherwise, likely only one team in from the CCIW this year.  Could be the same on the women's side.  Augie sure in the best position now, NPU still strong but often inconsistent, and IWU not really knowing how to finish off close games.  Seibring surely not 100%.  Not enough depth in the bigs.  Burdine surely not the answer, so Rose left to play Bausch and Beasley and that is not enough against a lot of CCIW competition. 

IWU'70

Whoa, Whoa, Whoa! Yes IWU missed Seibring and he still may not be 100% and not knowing if he will be. (Please let me know) but this team went into St Louis and took it to WashU who is a top ten team.  At full strength, IMHO IWU is a handful.  I don't think one bid from CCIW is close to realistic IMO

If the conference keeps beating itself up and taking losses each week to the teams we all expect to be at the top... there is a distinct possibility there is only one bid from the CCIW. WIAC only had one bid last year; so did the ODAC. It happens from time to time when the conferences eat themselves in conference play. That IWU win over WashU will mean nothing if they take too many more losses (in general speak; not an actual prediction).

True. But there's an enormous leap to go from "distinct possibility" to "likely".

Dave,

You bring up some great points as it relates to "teams that were expected to be at the top".  Augustana is a great example of a team, from a national point of view that was not expected to be at the top, because they lost an outstanding senior class, but they have developed into a really good team who leads the CCIW despite the loss of their outstanding senior class. I guess my point is that just because teams that are expected to be at the top and are not there at this point doesn't mean they are not quality teams.  I can't help but go back to Amherst who was "a team that was expected to be at the top " and are a middling team in the Nescac yet ranked 14 in d3.com poll.  Yes they beat Babson in OT at home, but as you mentioned previously, if you get a big win against a quality team but keep beating each other up in conference how can Amherst continue their ranking and be positioned for a post season birth?

First off, I am a little confused. You indicated I said a lot of things I didn't say. Where did your "teams that were expected to be at the top" come from my post? I had to read through things a few times before I gave up. If that was in reference to a completely different topic last month or prior... I can't remember what I was saying at the time...

What it seems like you are arguing is a different topic per rankings (both NCAA and D3hoops.com - D3.com is completely different LOL). Augustana is an interesting team this year. Really interesting. I am trying to figure out if they can survive the second trip through the conference or if teams will adjust and the Vikings will head back to where everyone thought they would be this season. I am fascinated and keep watching with interest.

I certainly agree that teams who are not near the top of conferences right now doesn't necessarily mean they aren't high-quality teams. I see that a lot after the first run through conference play in many conferences. That's why this time of year is when I truly perk my ears up and pay attention to see how teams do the second trip through. And this is where the top teams start to rise to the top and those who had pulled some upsets tend to settle back to earth.

However, I think you are contradicting yourself. You talk about teams in the middle of conference standings being better quality and then talk about Amherst maybe not being high quality because they are in the middle of the conference. You seem to indicate that there are high-quality teams in the middle of conferences, but then question why Amherst (who by your argument I would have thought you were saying was a high-quality team in the middle of their conference) is ranked 14th. Seems like you are flipping your argument.

As for Amherst, two losses in the NESCAC at this point in the season is going to put any team in the middle of the conference because there is no double-round-robin to even things out. It makes it more murky. However, I think Amherst is a very good team who had a bad weekend. There are some things about them that I do question, but to be honest there are no bonafide dominating teams this year who don't have question marks. There are even question marks about Babson. Granted, the Lord Jeffs lost four of six games at one point, but I didn't see them falling out of the rankings. Everyone was losing at the same time, there were several weeks between polls to allow more games to be evaluated (and losses to be absorbed) and they have at least come out of it with two straight wins. Should they continue to lose, they will be out. But they have the same number of losses at North Park who remains ranked... so what is the argument?

As a voter I can tell you, this parity thing is tough to truly read. Many people on these boards are hyper-focused on their team, conference, and/or region that seeing the entire picture can be a bit weighted. As one who looks at the entire nation... it is hard to gauge week to week what is going on. Add in the fact that really good teams can take some losses in conference and suddenly be in the middle of the pack for their conference and the head-scratching becomes harder. (I have had to look deeper into standings when looking at potential Hoopsville guests as to not miss an obvious team who in normal years would stand out on top; BTW if you want to see a really strange conference race, take a look at the SCAC).

As for Amherst and being "positioned for a post-season berth" ... remember our rankings have nothing to do with it. We will better understand how Amherst is positioned come Wednesday, February 10 when the first regional rankings come out. Their win over Babson will help (though, not too much in the first week's rankings)... but I think they will be okay. Dave Hixon said on Hoopsville at the beginning of the season he thought the men's race in the conference would be 7-8 teams deep. I thought he was kidding and maybe being a little too kind to his fellow coaches in the conference. However at this point, the NESCAC race does look that deep. We are only two years removed from Wesleyan winning the conference AQ as a 7-seed.

To my original point, we have seen conferences who are very good who beat each other up and end up with nothing in return. A few years ago the MAC Commonwealth (which may be the deepest conference year in and year out) had three or four really good teams (that was the year Messiah went 3/4s of the season undefeated). They only got two teams in when they really should have had three. But the teams took too many losses against each other. The NJAC almost yearly beats the hell out of each other. Coaches and advocates of the conference point at this as showing just how good the conference is as a power. The problem: they usually leave themselves with just the AQ in the tournament, maybe lucky to get a second team, and we have seen they also end up bowing out in the first round (they beat each other up so much I think it hurts them physically and emotionally when March rolls around). The WIAC showed last year when no one rose above the fray that they were a one-bid league. The ODAC, too (only an upset in the championship would have given them a second bid).

I am not saying in any way that the CCIW is absolutely going to be a one-bid league... not at all. What I am saying is if people here keep expecting more losses especially for the teams who are at the top (not expected, do finish on top), that could potentially be disastrous. And Sager, while you think it is a large leap from a "'distinct possibility' to 'likely'," I have found that that leap is far shorter than one realizes. In a matter of a week, a conference can go from looking to have two, three, even four bids to having a one, maybe two, if games play out in certain ways. That is exactly what happened in the final few weeks of the MACC a few years ago. The top of a conference has to still rise above the carnage, not get caught up in it.

[Gregory Sager]

I am not saying in any way that the CCIW is absolutely going to be a one-bid league... not at all. What I am saying is if people here keep expecting more losses especially for the teams who are at the top (not expected, do finish on top), that could potentially be disastrous. And Sager, while you think it is a large leap from a "'distinct possibility' to 'likely'," I have found that that leap is far shorter than one realizes. In a matter of a week, a conference can go from looking to have two, three, even four bids to having a one, maybe two, if games play out in certain ways. That is exactly what happened in the final few weeks of the MACC a few years ago. The top of a conference has to still rise above the carnage, not get caught up in it.

I'm not disputing at all the fact that the CCIW's landscape could change within the space of two game nights. Both Augustana and North Park have very difficult games this week; NPU hosts Illinois Wesleyan tonight, and Augie has to travel to Carthage on Saturday. By the end of Saturday night, the CCIW could be much closer to being a one-bid league than it is right now, although even then I still wouldn't use the adjective "likely" yet.

The problem with iwu70's assertion on Monday that the CCIW was already in a "likely, only one team in from the CCIW this year" situation is that it was premature. Given the standings as they're currently constituted, he had no grounds for saying that. By the end of Saturday night it could be a different story.

[Gregory Sager]

Current Massey:

    8. Augustana
  27. Illinois Wesleyan
  37. North Park
  55. Carthage
  78. North Central
  97. Carroll
111. Wheaton
168. Elmhurst
305. Millikin

Massey sez:

@ North Central 72, Millikin 58 (NCC 91%, MU 9%)
Illinois Wesleyan 78, @ North Park 77 (IWU 52%, NPU 48%)
@ Augustana 84, Elmhurst 68 (AC 93%, EC 7%)
Carthage 73, @ Carroll 72 (CC 52%, CU 48%)

[AndOne]

It's been touched on to some extent here recently, but there seems to be some question as to whether the Green Team's fine player Trevor Seibring is currently functioning at 100%. Also, if not, is he up in the 90% area, or more like 50%? A less than full strength Seibring is a tremendous advantage to NPU, especially considering their lack of an inside force on either end of the floor. Also, I think a key for NPU vs IWU will be to exploit the quickness/speed advantage they enjoy.

With regard to Augie @ Carthage on Sat., I think AC will have a successful trip. Carthage has been steadily slipping lately after their impressive start. AC by 9?

[4samuy]

Ypsi, as we all expected.  Any game, esp. road games, in the CCIW is tough.  Many teams will have to win the AQ to get into the Dance, otherwise, likely only one team in from the CCIW this year.  Could be the same on the women's side.  Augie sure in the best position now, NPU still strong but often inconsistent, and IWU not really knowing how to finish off close games.  Seibring surely not 100%.  Not enough depth in the bigs.  Burdine surely not the answer, so Rose left to play Bausch and Beasley and that is not enough against a lot of CCIW competition. 

IWU'70

Whoa, Whoa, Whoa! Yes IWU missed Seibring and he still may not be 100% and not knowing if he will be. (Please let me know) but this team went into St Louis and took it to WashU who is a top ten team.  At full strength, IMHO IWU is a handful.  I don't think one bid from CCIW is close to realistic IMO

If the conference keeps beating itself up and taking losses each week to the teams we all expect to be at the top... there is a distinct possibility there is only one bid from the CCIW. WIAC only had one bid last year; so did the ODAC. It happens from time to time when the conferences eat themselves in conference play. That IWU win over WashU will mean nothing if they take too many more losses (in general speak; not an actual prediction).

True. But there's an enormous leap to go from "distinct possibility" to "likely".

Dave,

You bring up some great points as it relates to "teams that were expected to be at the top".  Augustana is a great example of a team, from a national point of view that was not expected to be at the top, because they lost an outstanding senior class, but they have developed into a really good team who leads the CCIW despite the loss of their outstanding senior class. I guess my point is that just because teams that are expected to be at the top and are not there at this point doesn't mean they are not quality teams.  I can't help but go back to Amherst who was "a team that was expected to be at the top " and are a middling team in the Nescac yet ranked 14 in d3.com poll.  Yes they beat Babson in OT at home, but as you mentioned previously, if you get a big win against a quality team but keep beating each other up in conference how can Amherst continue their ranking and be positioned for a post season birth?

First off, I am a little confused. You indicated I said a lot of things I didn't say. Where did your "teams that were expected to be at the top" come from my post? I had to read through things a few times before I gave up. If that was in reference to a completely different topic last month or prior... I can't remember what I was saying at the time...

What it seems like you are arguing is a different topic per rankings (both NCAA and D3hoops.com - D3.com is completely different LOL). Augustana is an interesting team this year. Really interesting. I am trying to figure out if they can survive the second trip through the conference or if teams will adjust and the Vikings will head back to where everyone thought they would be this season. I am fascinated and keep watching with interest.

I certainly agree that teams who are not near the top of conferences right now doesn't necessarily mean they aren't high-quality teams. I see that a lot after the first run through conference play in many conferences. That's why this time of year is when I truly perk my ears up and pay attention to see how teams do the second trip through. And this is where the top teams start to rise to the top and those who had pulled some upsets tend to settle back to earth.

However, I think you are contradicting yourself. You talk about teams in the middle of conference standings being better quality and then talk about Amherst maybe not being high quality because they are in the middle of the conference. You seem to indicate that there are high-quality teams in the middle of conferences, but then question why Amherst (who by your argument I would have thought you were saying was a high-quality team in the middle of their conference) is ranked 14th. Seems like you are flipping your argument.

As for Amherst, two losses in the NESCAC at this point in the season is going to put any team in the middle of the conference because there is no double-round-robin to even things out. It makes it more murky. However, I think Amherst is a very good team who had a bad weekend. There are some things about them that I do question, but to be honest there are no bonafide dominating teams this year who don't have question marks. There are even question marks about Babson. Granted, the Lord Jeffs lost four of six games at one point, but I didn't see them falling out of the rankings. Everyone was losing at the same time, there were several weeks between polls to allow more games to be evaluated (and losses to be absorbed) and they have at least come out of it with two straight wins. Should they continue to lose, they will be out. But they have the same number of losses at North Park who remains ranked... so what is the argument?

As a voter I can tell you, this parity thing is tough to truly read. Many people on these boards are hyper-focused on their team, conference, and/or region that seeing the entire picture can be a bit weighted. As one who looks at the entire nation... it is hard to gauge week to week what is going on. Add in the fact that really good teams can take some losses in conference and suddenly be in the middle of the pack for their conference and the head-scratching becomes harder. (I have had to look deeper into standings when looking at potential Hoopsville guests as to not miss an obvious team who in normal years would stand out on top; BTW if you want to see a really strange conference race, take a look at the SCAC).

As for Amherst and being "positioned for a post-season berth" ... remember our rankings have nothing to do with it. We will better understand how Amherst is positioned come Wednesday, February 10 when the first regional rankings come out. Their win over Babson will help (though, not too much in the first week's rankings)... but I think they will be okay. Dave Hixon said on Hoopsville at the beginning of the season he thought the men's race in the conference would be 7-8 teams deep. I thought he was kidding and maybe being a little too kind to his fellow coaches in the conference. However at this point, the NESCAC race does look that deep. We are only two years removed from Wesleyan winning the conference AQ as a 7-seed.

To my original point, we have seen conferences who are very good who beat each other up and end up with nothing in return. A few years ago the MAC Commonwealth (which may be the deepest conference year in and year out) had three or four really good teams (that was the year Messiah went 3/4s of the season undefeated). They only got two teams in when they really should have had three. But the teams took too many losses against each other. The NJAC almost yearly beats the hell out of each other. Coaches and advocates of the conference point at this as showing just how good the conference is as a power. The problem: they usually leave themselves with just the AQ in the tournament, maybe lucky to get a second team, and we have seen they also end up bowing out in the first round (they beat each other up so much I think it hurts them physically and emotionally when March rolls around). The WIAC showed last year when no one rose above the fray that they were a one-bid league. The ODAC, too (only an upset in the championship would have given them a second bid).

I am not saying in any way that the CCIW is absolutely going to be a one-bid league... not at all. What I am saying is if people here keep expecting more losses especially for the teams who are at the top (not expected, do finish on top), that could potentially be disastrous. And Sager, while you think it is a large leap from a "'distinct possibility' to 'likely'," I have found that that leap is far shorter than one realizes. In a matter of a week, a conference can go from looking to have two, three, even four bids to having a one, maybe two, if games play out in certain ways. That is exactly what happened in the final few weeks of the MACC a few years ago. The top of a conference has to still rise above the carnage, not get caught up in it.

Dave,

Your thoughts and analysis are always interesting and appreciated.  Thanks much!

[iwu70]

NPU up 14 over the Titans at the half.  NPU just too quick for the Titans so far.  Seibring surely not at 100%.  Robinson with 20 first half points.  Titans have no answer for him.

IWU'70