MBB: Centennial Conference

Started by swish, March 01, 2005, 04:51:33 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

0 Members and 3 Guests are viewing this topic.

sunny

Quote from: ddm1027 on February 04, 2012, 12:24:22 AM
In fact, I would love to see the CC expand the tournament to include all of the teams (or at least 8).  It might be a little more expensive in terms of travel but everyone would have something to play for and there could always be a huge upset or two.  Hosting a playoff game would also be great for the fan atmosphere at the top seeded schools and create a little more energy and interest going into the semis and finals.

Disagree. Five teams makes making the conference tournament mean something. The stretch run would be less fun if the games were solely about positioning like they are in some conferences.  Expand the tournament to all and you take away the achievement of making it.  Expand the tournament past half the conference and you take the positive spotlight off the teams who made it and cast a negative spotlight on the few who didn't. 

Swat Fan #1

DDM - I can talk a little bit about what you were saying as I was actually a part of the recruiting of all of those colleges. Having gone to numerous AAU tournaments, the Williams and Amhersts of college basketball were always there. I probably got to know close to 50 DIII college coaches. I can honestly tell you I never saw one coach from ANY Centennial Conference at these tournament (and many were in Penn and NJ). The Gym Rat AAU tournament in Albany attracts at least a hundred DIII coaches and again I never met one Centennial coach there.

I can't speak for the other colleges, but I am positive Swarthmore will not lower their standards to get a recruit. Academics are so incredibly hard at Swarthmore that a recruit who doesn't measure up would soon be ineligible. So, it is what it is. Swarthmore will always struggle to beat conference teams.

sunny

It's not impossible to have successful sports at Swarthmore or Haverford.  Basketball can be different from other sports, sure, but the academic rigors/standards have not hand-cuffed Swarthmore in soccer or tennis or Haverford in lacrosse, track, and cross country (among other sports for both).  And mentioning Hopkins in that conversation is way off-base.  Hopkins may be going through a "down" cycle in men's hoops (their women are nationally-ranked), but nearly every other sport they have is consistently among the tops in the conference, region, and/or nation and their men's basketball program is certainly no stranger to success. 

Dave 'd-mac' McHugh

I read that story on SI several times... and not once came away with the adage that Middlebury or MIT lowered their standards for students. In fact, the article talked about how some students went to those schools for their specific academics (e.g. foreign languages, engineering, etc.). Heck, one student transferred from Brown... don't think Brown had lowered it's standards at any point.

What I got out of that was that they changed their recruiting tactics and that has helped them become a bigger player in recruiting... and they are doing it with the Ivy schools - again they aren't lowering their standards.

Recruiting is key and many schools like Johns Hopkins have shown they can get recruits in other sports (see soccer and football for JHU)...
Host of Hoopsville. USBWA Executive Board member. Broadcast Director for D3sports.com. Broadcaster for NCAA.com & several colleges. PA Announcer for Gophers & Brigade. Follow me on Twitter: @davemchugh or @d3hoopsville.

Pat Coleman

And Amherst and Williams -- those schools are on par with Swarthmore in the U.S News rankings every year so I doubt they are lowering their standards to admit a bunch of kids.

But if I were a student-athlete, I don't know if I would attend Swarthmore because of the apparent attitude towards athletes on campus. I know Al Bloom is no longer president there but his disdain for football players and student-athletes in general was pretty evident. They said they had too many student-athletes on campus and decided to limit the number of them in each class. What kind of message does that send to anyone who is good enough to get into Swarthmore and also takes athletics seriously?
Publisher. Questions? Check our FAQ for D3f, D3h.
Quote from: old 40 on September 25, 2007, 08:23:57 PMLet's discuss (sports) in a positive way, sometimes kidding each other with no disrespect.

Dips75

Quote from: Pat Coleman on February 04, 2012, 12:32:49 PM
And Amherst and Williams -- those schools are on par with Swarthmore in the U.S News rankings every year so I doubt they are lowering their standards to admit a bunch of kids.

But if I were a student-athlete, I don't know if I would attend Swarthmore because of the apparent attitude towards athletes on campus. I know Al Bloom is no longer president there but his disdain for football players and student-athletes in general was pretty evident. They said they had too many student-athletes on campus and decided to limit the number of them in each class. What kind of message does that send to anyone who is good enough to get into Swarthmore and also takes athletics seriously?

Absolutely agreed. I played football at F&M a few years before Swarthmore eliminated football, and now live in Massachusetts, finishing my doctorate at UMass, which is part of the five-college program with Amherst. Both Amherst and Williams maintain remarkably high academic standards while succeeding in many DIII sports.

Ultimately, it's schools like Amherst and Williams that show how athletics can be a part of an overall collegiate experience. This is the high bar set for other programs throughout DIII.

UCHooligan98

all this stuff about Swat having trouble recruiting athletes is true but you have to admit, they are definitely number 1 at recruiting harry potter loving world of warcraft playing uber nerds!

Gusthegoose

Ursinus over Gettysburg
Haverford over McDaniel
Johns Hopkins over Swarthmore
Washington College over Dickinson
Franklin and Marshall over Muhlenberg

dipphan

Swarthmore athletics is a joke.  I live in town there and there is minimal support- we remember the football fiasco and now you can only get fans to the stadium for basketball games only when they are giving out free food.  Academics is strong there but it is also strong at Haverford, Hopkins, and F&M and those schools are very supportive of the athletic programs.  Thank you Swat Dad for supporting the athletic program, but like Republicans in the town itself, the supporters are small in number. 

Thank goodness this problem does not exist at the classiest school in Division 3 Franklin and Marshall.  Back in 61 when I was admitted, I had the highest grades and credentials and it was still tough to get into F&M.  With the best coach and the best player in the Conference in men's hoops who would not want to play there and see the games on the most authentic, classiest, and best floor in the nation- Mayser Gym. 

I will be wearing my F&M hat today at the game if anyone wants to buy me a beer or a scotch!

ddm1027

One of the biggest differences I remember attendance wise was that all of the Haverford, Swarthmore, and Hopkins parents were not at every game (some did come but many did not live within a reasonable driving distance to always be there).  Sadly, you really notice 15-25 loud parents at games at most venues in the Centennial.  F&M and Ursinus have had pretty good crowds over the last several years but not most of the rest of the league.  I agree with others that the fans who do come are generally very good (like many of you).  Lets be honest about most Division III programs though, they are not getting huge support from the local community outside the college.  Even Amherst, whose games I went to regularly the year they finished 2nd (and the year after they won it all), did not get many fans and had far less campus support than I expected (fewer fans than F&M for sure except when Amherst played Williams). 
Amherst and Williams (and Middlebury and MIT) are slightly more relaxed with admissions (ask the coaches or ADs at Haverford or Swarthmore about this), but it still takes a lot to get in.  However, lets also not kid ourselves with Haverford, Hopkins, and Swarthmore either; they are not like Caltech, who only takes players who would get in without assistance (and an applicant's basketball experience is treated by the admissions office like being a good dancer).  Recruited athletes still get more than a little edge in admissions at these great schools, and other Centennial schools as well, as it is.  Getting into them is significantly more difficult though than getting into an Ivy as a recruit (where they use the AI).  I was recruited to play another sport in the Ivy League and received special applications and an estimated aid package before even applying.  You can look at an article on Ivy recruiting and the AI here: http://www.nytimes.com/2011/12/25/sports/before-athletic-recruiting-in-the-ivy-league-some-math.html?pagewanted=all
I agree with "sunny" that Hopkins has done a far better job than Swarthmore and Haverford.  Overall, they clearly have the best athletic department in the CC (though their best programs are outside the CC).  Hopkins has been in the top 13 for the D-III Director's Cup the last two years.  Nonetheless, the basketball program has not been a national player at all in recent memory and they have some of the worst attendance in the league.

ddm1027

Harvard has been more aggressive recruiting and has been admitting players they probably wouldn't have before Amaker arrived: http://www.nytimes.com/2008/03/02/sports/ncaabasketball/02harvard.html.

It will take a similar combination for the top three academic schools in the CC to regularly be at the top of the league in men's basketball.  As the teams get a lot better, the campus support at those places is likely to follow to at least a certain degree (look at soccer at JHU and Swarthmore over the last several years for examples of this).

Warren Thompson

Quote from: dipphan on February 04, 2012, 01:57:27 PM
. . .  who would not want to play there and see the games on the most authentic, classiest, and best floor in the nation- Mayser Gym. 

Kindly explain how a "floor" can be "the most authentic" and "classiest."  And "best floor in the nation"? Hardly. There are high school "floors" that are light-years better.

donho

  Mayser gym was a dump back in the 70's . Have they remodeled it?

Pat Coleman

I've always been of the mind that you should never have to tell someone how classy you are -- class should just exude from the program, it shouldn't have to be bragged about.

I can think of some programs like that in Division III basketball.
Publisher. Questions? Check our FAQ for D3f, D3h.
Quote from: old 40 on September 25, 2007, 08:23:57 PMLet's discuss (sports) in a positive way, sometimes kidding each other with no disrespect.

dipphan

The mvp was ice cold and the division 3 refs were horrible.  rough loss in mule town.  not classy by mule fans to storm court.