MBB: Landmark Conference

[ronk]

  In response to a suggestion(probably Saratoga's) on hoopsville that Hartwick would have been a better choice for Williams' regional  than Scranton, Pat Coleman said that he'd rather play Scranton's opponent, Becker, than Hartwick's(Purchase) in the 1st round.

Ronk,


Did he say why? Becker has 400 steals for the season, I am having flashbacks to Elms a few years ago.

Nepa,
No, it was like Dmac said- just a general overall observation. Hopefully, Becker won't resemble Elms of 3 years ago. That was a painful experience and Scranton had a far better team then than now.

[Pat Coleman]

One moment we hear the Regional ranking is the Gold Standard. Fair enough...then where is Kean? For 3 weeks they were the Atlantic # 2 & now no spot for them?

I think you're missing the point here. They were the No. 2. Of course, they lost in their conference semifinals and ended up the No. 4. And No. 4 of five in a small region like the Atlantic is one spot from the bottom, like being No. 7 or No. 8 out of nine in the Mid-Atlantic.

Being regionally ranked is your position in the pecking order for an at-large bid. If you're behind St. Joe's LI in the Atlantic, you won't get selected before they do. There's nothing that says the Atlantic has to get any at-large teams in at all, so you definitely do not want to be third in line.

Gwynedd ends up 21-6, gets crushed in their conference championship yet only has to travel a little over an hour to their site while F&M, a conference CHAMPION with a record of 22-5 gets sent packing to look for the decendents of the Lost Colony of Roanoke?

For years there has been no special treatment for Pool A vs. Pool C. Remember in 2002 or somesuch, every team that got a first-round bye was a Pool C team. Winning a conference gets you in, it doesn't guarantee you a particular seed. There were seven Mid-Atlantic conference champs and obviously not all can get preferential treatment.

1   La Roche (cannot host, sent to SE Ohio)   
2   St. Mary's (Md.)   (hosts)
3   Cabrini   (hosts)
5   Franklin & Marshall   (at Va. Wesleyan)
8   Alvernia   (at St. Mary's)
9   Scranton   (at Williams)
UN   Delaware Valley (at Va. Wesleyan)

I don't think I missed anyone.

Then we have the Royals headed to Williamstown as a conference CHAMPION while Bridgewater St. with a record of 18-9 stays home in Mass. (no real diversity there). Wells College in New York with a record of 17-11 makes that always tough 1 hour trip to downtown Oswego,NY. (still not feeling the diversity for teams with lousy records), and Wittenberg at 19-8 making the trans Ohio trip to Marietta had to be a real tough call for the geography majors at the helm. However, the placement that has to have the committee shaking hands & passing out cigars is the work group that came up with Hartwick with 10 losses heading from rural Upstate New York into the extrenly diverse burbs of Philly. This has to be the placement this committee is pointing to to show that diversity can & does work!
In reality guys, there is no rhyme or reason to most of these placements & the truth of the matter is conference champs with good records are going places that will not be fan friendly for a rather loyal following while at the same time teams with average records get to play within an hour or so of campus.

Some teams with average records are closer to home, yes.

Some conference champs (there are more than 40!) are sent further on the road.

There is no perfect way to do it.

THere is some rhyme or reason, it's just not perfect.

[NEPAFAN]

Because Purchase is playing extremely well right now and closed the season on a tear. Becker stumbled in the conference finals and seemed a bit more mortal as the season closed.

As for steals stats... that is subjective... depends if the SID is one that credits every turnover with a steal (I have seen it happen) or one that is somewhat loose with his interpretation.

Purchase beats Bard and the like and Becker losses to Elms an NCAA tourney team.  Still would take my chances with Purchase.

Really hoping that Scranton can get to Williams, would be fun to see the Royals against the Elite of Division 3.

[Matt Letourneau]

Pat,
Is it your general belief that the Committee did a good job overall, or do you think that some of the criticisms expressed on her might be justified?  (This isn't a loaded question, I'm truly just asking.  I'm not even going to pretend to know or understand the process and criteria as well as you, D-Mac and some others.)

I know you said it isn't perfect, but it does seem like a few of these things could be easily corrected.  There does seem to be some inherent unfairness in who gets to play where.  Obviously the cream will rise to the top and if a team is good enough, they'll win anyway--in my personal experience I don't have to look any further than the 2001 Cardinals getting sent (conveniently for me since it was during winter break) to Clark in Worcester, Mass., in a massive snowstorm--but that doesn't neccessarily excuse it.   I think what gets people is not the criteria, is that they are inconsistently applied.

[augie]

Saratoga you have some great points.I was just looking around the board and i am wondering why everybody else in the country gets two host sites in region and the Northeast got 3 and the Atlantic got 1.I am not sure but i think Purchase is number 1 in that region and Ramapo was 2.Some insight please

[Pat Coleman]

Clark was a sectional, so that's a bit of a different story. You have to anticipate that when you're down to 16 teams, you might have to travel. Catholic got a home game and a short trip to Widener before that and the bracket was much more regional.

I think the issue here is what fans want is not really a part of the equation. And it's not at the D-I level either, witness three D.C. area teams being sent to Boise in 2002 or so. They have tried to change in D-I that but it's for cost savings purposes, not for fan travel.

For me, I would say that part of the NCAA Tournament experience is getting to play someone new. Sometimes that means it has to get played in a new place.

Because so many teams play title games on Sundays, the NCAA committee has basically about 12 hours to build the perfect bracket. (In Division I where there are a few Sunday games, those games almost always involve teams who are already going to be in the tournament. The D-III games have bearing on who actually is getting in.) I know this means little to the Mid-Atlantic folks but the fact that we've had two years in a row without a bracket of death clumping a bunch of Midwest teams in the same pod or quadrant is a significant step forward.

To me a four-hour drive (by Google, probably 3:45 in real life) from Scranton to Williamstown is not a big burden. The NCAA slots Scranton in the Mid-Atlantic but fans should adjust their expectations and realize what the committee knows, that any site within 500 miles is fair game.

[Pat Coleman]

Saratoga you have some great points.I was just looking around the board and i am wondering why everybody else in the country gets two host sites in region and the Northeast got 3 and the Atlantic got 1.I am not sure but i think Purchase is number 1 in that region and Ramapo was 2.Some insight please

The Northeast has about 70 teams and the Atlantic has about 35.

Purchase did not put in to host. The gym is being used this weekend.

[augie]

Thanks pat!

[Dave 'd-mac' McHugh]

Also, I know that the national committee tries to put only one #1 regionally ranked team in a pod... only one #2 regionally ranked team in pod... and so forth. It isn't perfect... but got through each pod and you will find hardly any common regionally ranked teams.

That being said... #2 RMC is in with #2 SMC... so the system isn't that perfect. (I also think RMC should have been #1 and VWC #2, but that wouldn't have changed the pods anyway).

cold_case - you and certainly say whatever you want... but I am quite sure you aren't talking for a majority of people. That being said... I know quite a lot of about journalism as it pays my bills and allows me to also have the time to dedicate to this site and coverage of Division III sports. You can say anything you want... but don't try and use "journalism" as an excuse after the comments you make are anything but "professional."

[Matt Letourneau]

Okay...I had forgotten the exact path they took--though the point still stands, I suppose--if you're good enough, you'll win anywhere.  Can you believe it has been 10 years?

[LustyLarryintheToilet]

Also, I know that the national committee tries to put only one #1 regionally ranked team in a pod... only one #2 regionally ranked team in pod... and so forth. It isn't perfect... but got through each pod and you will find hardly any common regionally ranked teams.

what do you mean? no teams of the same ranking in a four team pod or no teams ranked in same region in 4 team pod?

[Dave 'd-mac' McHugh]

They try and get as few common regionally ranked teams as possible - especially the higher seeds. That is my frustration with the RMC/SMC pod... though I would argue RMC probably should have been #1 in the South.

[LustyLarryintheToilet]

of the 16 pods, it looks like 13 have two teams regionally ranked in the same region but hey, only 2 of those 13 have 3 ranked teams in same pod

[Pat Coleman]

This is what Dave said.

"one #1 regionally ranked team in a pod... only one #2 regionally ranked team in pod"

You do know you're counting something different, yes?

[LustyLarryintheToilet]

pat all i did was ask dave to clarify, and from his answer my presumption was the committee tried to break up ranked regional teams, meaning you wouldnt get two MA teams together, two east, etc.  Lets be honest, splitting up all the 1 and 2 seeds wouldnt be that hard, theres only 16 for 16 pods.