MBB: Michigan Intercollegiate Athletic Association

[Mr. Ypsi]

Titan Q (or Ziggy or Sac or OldKnight), help me to understand the argument that MIAA teams would boost their Pool C chances by scheduling more in-region games.  The quantitative yardstick doesn't explicitly mention number of games, but rather:
• Win-loss percentage against regional opponents
• Strength-of-schedule (only contests versus regional competition).
- Opponents' Average Winning Percentage (OWP). . . .

So, if School A is 5-1 against in-region opponents, School B is 10-2, and School C is 15-3 . . . and their opponents' SOS is the same. . . is there an advantage to having more (as opposited to a higher percentage of) in-region wins? 

While not explicitly stated, I guarantee that 15-3 beats the heck out of 5-1!

The unstated assumption that Q and others are making is that you WIN those extra in-region games.

17-4 beats the heck out of 13-4, and, if judiciously selected, should give you a better SOS as well.  (SOS within a conference inevitably trends towards .500, with the best teams faring the worst.)

[KnightSlappy]

I was flipping through the pictures on my digital camera today and found out that the wife took a bit of game footage from Saturday's championship contest. She's my designated filmographer in case some last possesion heroics are in order.

She apparently decided to record a couple of Calvin's late possessions (despite my urgings that it was not necessary). So here's the two clips she caught (and I'm not trying to re-light any fires, just thought it was funny):

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WSwrtgTl7DU
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=81aqe-Yck2s

[pointlem]

The unstated assumption that Q and others are making is that you WIN those extra in-region games.

Precisely (as I read it), which means that playing more games may or may not be to one's advantage.  If a 10-2 team plays five more in-region games and ends up 13-4, its win-loss percentage suffers.  So it seems like the NCAA's system is, prudently, not strongly encouraging student-athletes to be carted long distances to build up their in-region game count. . . . yes?

[Titan Q]

Titan Q (or Ziggy or Sac or OldKnight), help me to understand the argument that MIAA teams would boost their Pool C chances by scheduling more in-region games.  The quantitative yardstick doesn't explicitly mention number of games, but rather:
• Win-loss percentage against regional opponents
• Strength-of-schedule (only contests versus regional competition).
- Opponents' Average Winning Percentage (OWP). . . .

So, if School A is 5-1 against in-region opponents, School B is 10-2, and School C is 15-3 . . . and their opponents' SOS is the same. . . is there an advantage to having more (as opposited to a higher percentage of) in-region wins?  

Calvin finished 15-4 in-region (.789).  16-4 (.800) might have done it, and 17-4 (.810) definitely would have.

The fewer the in-region games, the more those late season losses drop the in-region winning %.  Note, Calvin and Hope played the fewest in-region games (19) of any Pool A/C teams listed in the final regional rankings...

http://www.ncaa.com/sports/m-baskbl/spec-rel/030110aae.html

Only Chapman - a Pool B team in Southern California that doesn't play in a conference - played less.  (And Chapman only played 1 less in-region game than Calvin and Hope.)  The average amount of in-region games seems to be about 26.

And here is another factor...

I happen to know there are some committee members who definitely do not view 16-4 (.800) the same as 20-5 (.800).  (Anderson finished 20-5 in-region.)  

[ChicagoHopeNut]

The unstated assumption that Q and others are making is that you WIN those extra in-region games.

Precisely (as I read it), which means that playing more games may or may not be to one's advantage.  If a 10-2 team plays five more in-region games and ends up 13-4, its win-loss percentage suffers. So it seems like the NCAA's system is, prudently, not strongly encouraging student-athletes to be carted long distances to build up their in-region game count. . . . yes?

You are assuming the NCAA is taking an intentional, well thought out position on this. If that is the case, it would be the first time the NCAA has ever taken a well thought out position on anything so probably not the case.

Also, I think the point Mr. Ypsi and Titan Q above are making is that the number of games played matter. It may not be an official criteria but 20-5 is not the same as 5-1.

[calvin_grad]

Calvin finished 15-4 in-region (.789).  16-4 (.800) might have done it, and 17-4 (.810) definitely would have.

Yes, but what about 16-3 (.842)?   

[Mr. Ypsi]

Q makes an excellent point.  Unless you are in the UAA (the only conference without a conference tournament), the only way you need to worry about a Pool C is if you pick up a conference tourney loss.  That loss is much less damaging if you are already 16-3 than if you are 12-3.

EDIT: Calvin_grad, good point, but by that time the only way to finish 16-3 was to beat Hope, in which case this whole discussion would be moot!

[Gregory Sager]

Also, I think the point Mr. Ypsi and Titan Q above are making is that the number of games played matter. It may not be an official criteria but 20-5 is not the same as 5-1.

A 5-1 record wouldn't matter, because the championship handbook states that you have to play at least half of your games against in-region D3 competition in order to qualify for a Pool B or Pool C bid, unless you obtain a waiver from the NCAA.

[ziggy]

If Hope, Calvin, and the rest of the MIAA limited out of conference in-region play and thus built their regional record on conference play then the SOS would trend toward .500. The benefit of playing a wider variety of non-conference in-region games is to build a strong resume aside from just the WP.

[calvin_grad]

Q makes an excellent point.  Unless you are in the UAA (the only conference without a conference tournament), the only way you need to worry about a Pool C is if you pick up a conference tourney loss.  That loss is much less damaging if you are already 16-3 than if you are 12-3.

EDIT: Calvin_grad, good point, but by that time the only way to finish 16-3 was to beat Hope, in which case this whole discussion would be moot!

What if they had beaten Olivet during the regular season, but still lost the tourney final?  They would have finished 16-3 in-region. Then the discussion wouldn't be moot, but would have definitely surpassed "flaggellating a lifeless equine" status.   

[almcguirejr]

Q makes an excellent point.  Unless you are in the UAA (the only conference without a conference tournament), the only way you need to worry about a Pool C is if you pick up a conference tourney loss.  That loss is much less damaging if you are already 16-3 than if you are 12-3.

EDIT: Calvin_grad, good point, but by that time the only way to finish 16-3 was to beat Hope, in which case this whole discussion would be moot!

What if they had beaten Olivet during the regular season, but still lost the tourney final?  They would have finished 16-3 in-region. Then the discussion wouldn't be moot, but would have definitely surpassed "flaggellating a lifeless equine" status.   

If Calvin could have split with Hope (2-2) maybe they could have  been in.  Calvin lost twice on their own floor.  Calvin lost the last 2 games to Hope when they had the lead with 3 minutes to go.  They had opportunities that they didn't convert.

Last year a loss to Kalamazoo probably kept them out.  Calvin didn't always play with the sense of urgency that was required.  I think that is what kept them out of the tounament more than in region scheduling.

[almcguirejr]

I was flipping through the pictures on my digital camera today and found out that the wife took a bit of game footage from Saturday's championship contest. She's my designated filmographer in case some last possesion heroics are in order.

She apparently decided to record a couple of Calvin's late possessions (despite my urgings that it was not necessary). So here's the two clips she caught (and I'm not trying to re-light any fires, just thought it was funny):

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WSwrtgTl7DU
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=81aqe-Yck2s

The Venema foul on Campbell is more egregious than the Bunn foul.

[GoKnights68]

I was flipping through the pictures on my digital camera today and found out that the wife took a bit of game footage from Saturday's championship contest. She's my designated filmographer in case some last possesion heroics are in order.

She apparently decided to record a couple of Calvin's late possessions (despite my urgings that it was not necessary). So here's the two clips she caught (and I'm not trying to re-light any fires, just thought it was funny):

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WSwrtgTl7DU
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=81aqe-Yck2s

Of course we all might be wearing different color glasses than neutral observers, but I talked to a few guys that were sitting right under the basket.  They said Mantel easily got hacked.


Did your wife also happen to be at the 2006 NCAA tourney second round Calvin/Hope match-up and be taping the last half minute as well?

[sac]

Peter Bunn, who actually was on the court and made the play said in his post game interview he got the ball clean.  The official who made the decision, was immediate in his signal.

Nice shove by Mantel on Venema on the rebound......we could go on all day about this stuff.

[GoKnights68]

Peter Bunn, who actually was on the court and made the play said in his post game interview he got the ball clean.  The official who made the decision, was immediate in his signal.

Nice shove by Mantel on Venema on the rebound......we could go on all day about this stuff.

That's what this forum is for, though, Sac.  I know it is Hope who is the only MIAA team left, but this is still a MIAA board where we, as in fans, are free to talk about anything MIAA-related.

There was one poster who may have brought up this possession on here a couple too many times to not call it complaining, but other than that, Calvin fans really didn't complain about it too much and immediately congratulated Hope on the victory.  Now that we have a video that was provided, it is natural for there to be a little discussion about the play...especially with the Hope game not being for a few days.

Personally I had a bad view of the play and was just going by what I heard from some friends sitting under the basket.