MBB: Centennial Conference

[givengo]

As a Dickinson fan who has followed the team to Ohio--twice --and to Illinois as well as Virginia,  I have no problem at all with NCAA bracketology. You go where you need to go and you'd better be ready to play. 
I would like to see standardization among all host sites as far as ticket price and what that ticket entitles the holder to.  For most venues in my experience, your ticket entitles you to two games at the site for that evening.  At Randolph Macon last year for the Sweet Sixteen, our ticket entitled us to one game only and we were cleared from the gym before the second game.  It's my feeling that all tournament  host venues should be required to agree to the same ticket price and admissions policy, and it should be published as such. JMHO

[Dave 'd-mac' McHugh]

As a Dickinson fan who has followed the team to Ohio--twice --and to Illinois as well as Virginia,  I have no problem at all with NCAA bracketology. You go where you need to go and you'd better be ready to play. 
I would like to see standardization among all host sites as far as ticket price and what that ticket entitles the holder to.  For most venues in my experience, your ticket entitles you to two games at the site for that evening.  At Randolph Macon last year for the Sweet Sixteen, our ticket entitled us to one game only and we were cleared from the gym before the second game.  It's my feeling that all tournament  host venues should be required to agree to the same ticket price and admissions policy, and it should be published as such. JMHO

Per the tickets - that is something the venue clears with the NCAA. Think about it from the NCAA's point of view: guarantees to sell out three games or two days? More money with three games to help offset the tournaments is going to win out. I think the mentality is that the ticket gets you into the game you are attending. You are getting a gift to see the other game. In the case of "split sessions," they are trying to help those fans who want to see their team. Would you want to explain to the visitors of the next game that they can't get into the game because you wanted to watch both and got your tickets first? Split sessions are not that common - handful every year.

[ronk]

As a Dickinson fan who has followed the team to Ohio--twice --and to Illinois as well as Virginia,  I have no problem at all with NCAA bracketology. You go where you need to go and you'd better be ready to play. 
I would like to see standardization among all host sites as far as ticket price and what that ticket entitles the holder to.  For most venues in my experience, your ticket entitles you to two games at the site for that evening.  At Randolph Macon last year for the Sweet Sixteen, our ticket entitled us to one game only and we were cleared from the gym before the second game.  It's my feeling that all tournament  host venues should be required to agree to the same ticket price and admissions policy, and it should be published as such. JMHO

Here are the minimum ticket prices:
2. Ticket Prices. Ticket prices will be determined by the tournament director in consultation
with the Division III Men's Basketball Committee championship manager, Elisa Halpin
(317-917-6909). Any special ticket plans or prices (for senior citizens, youth groups, etc.)
must be approved in advance by the NCAA championship manager.
Preliminary-Round Site. Minimum ticket prices shall be as follows:
First/Second Rounds Sectional Rounds
$10 -- Reserved $10 -- Reserved single session
$10 -- General admission $10 -- General admission single session
$5 -- Senior citizens, all students and children $5 -- Senior citizens, all students and children
Free – Under two Free – Under two
Semifinals/Final Site.
$15 Single-session adult $25 All-session adult
$7.50 Single-session student/youth/senior $12.50 All-session student/youth/senior
$5 Single-session group Free Under two
Free Under two

[njf1003]

All CC teams announced:
http://centennial.org/sports/mbkb/2015-16/releases/All-CC

Hinnenkamp POTY
Scibelli ROTY
Kosmalski COTY

[Hooper]

A travesty...  No Ursinus players listed? They must reconsider....

[givengo]

Per the tickets - that is something the venue clears with the NCAA. Think about it from the NCAA's point of view: guarantees to sell out three games or two days? More money with three games to help offset the tournaments is going to win out. I think the mentality is that the ticket gets you into the game you are attending. You are getting a gift to see the other game. In the case of "split sessions," they are trying to help those fans who want to see their team. Would you want to explain to the visitors of the next game that they can't get into the game because you wanted to watch both and got your tickets first? Split sessions are not that common - handful every year.
[/quote]

Right and I get that.  I think it would be better AND more tickets would be sold if, beyond the first two rounds there was a larger minimum requirement for seating at host venues.  Case in point, both Wooster and Illinois Wesleyan must bus in fans from every old folks home within 50 miles.  Their fan base is incredible  ( heard cute little ladies with blue hair and padded seat in hand --at both venues, no less-- saying "they're in MY seat!")   and yet they never cleared a gym in either location.  I have no objection to buying a second ticket, but that would have been impossible at Randolph Macon. My issue is limited access and not a two for one.

[Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan)]

Per the tickets - that is something the venue clears with the NCAA. Think about it from the NCAA's point of view: guarantees to sell out three games or two days? More money with three games to help offset the tournaments is going to win out. I think the mentality is that the ticket gets you into the game you are attending. You are getting a gift to see the other game. In the case of "split sessions," they are trying to help those fans who want to see their team. Would you want to explain to the visitors of the next game that they can't get into the game because you wanted to watch both and got your tickets first? Split sessions are not that common - handful every year.

Right and I get that.  I think it would be better AND more tickets would be sold if, beyond the first two rounds there was a larger minimum requirement for seating at host venues.  Case in point, both Wooster and Illinois Wesleyan must bus in fans from every old folks home within 50 miles.  Their fan base is incredible  ( heard cute little ladies with blue hair and padded seat in hand --at both venues, no less-- saying "they're in MY seat!")   and yet they never cleared a gym in either location.  I have no objection to buying a second ticket, but that would have been impossible at Randolph Macon. My issue is limited access and not a two for one.
[/quote]

I'd guess they can tell when the home team will sell out, but it's got to be difficult to make that call as early as you need to make it, knowing that one of the other game's fans will sell out, too.  Some teams travel well, but it's not always enough to make a split ticket worth it.

[Dave 'd-mac' McHugh]

Per the tickets - that is something the venue clears with the NCAA. Think about it from the NCAA's point of view: guarantees to sell out three games or two days? More money with three games to help offset the tournaments is going to win out. I think the mentality is that the ticket gets you into the game you are attending. You are getting a gift to see the other game. In the case of "split sessions," they are trying to help those fans who want to see their team. Would you want to explain to the visitors of the next game that they can't get into the game because you wanted to watch both and got your tickets first? Split sessions are not that common - handful every year.

Right and I get that.  I think it would be better AND more tickets would be sold if, beyond the first two rounds there was a larger minimum requirement for seating at host venues.  Case in point, both Wooster and Illinois Wesleyan must bus in fans from every old folks home within 50 miles.  Their fan base is incredible  ( heard cute little ladies with blue hair and padded seat in hand --at both venues, no less-- saying "they're in MY seat!")   and yet they never cleared a gym in either location.  I have no objection to buying a second ticket, but that would have been impossible at Randolph Macon. My issue is limited access and not a two for one.

I'd guess they can tell when the home team will sell out, but it's got to be difficult to make that call as early as you need to make it, knowing that one of the other game's fans will sell out, too.  Some teams travel well, but it's not always enough to make a split ticket worth it.
[/quote]

Furthermore, this would eliminate a lot of schools from ever hosting... causing the opening weekends to always be at the same venues year after year depending on bracketing and selections. That isn't fair to schools who could easily host with some small exceptions. The NCAA has even tried to find ways to get even smaller venues the opportunity just because this is Division III afterall.

As for the Randolph-Macon example from last year... that was also an extenuating circumstance. If VWC wasn't going to be in the pod or a possible match-up on Saturday, they probably wouldn't have asked for a split session. That rivalry dictated that. Heck, there were more VWC fans in that gym because of the way the NCAA allocates tickets then can get into that gym during the regular season. RMC was actually being more fair to VWC and less fair to their own fans in that circumstance.

I am willing to bet if Calvin was hosting the 2nd weekend and Hope was their match-up... they would ask for a split session and they can seat 5,000 easy! There are sometimes other factors in play that make these decisions different.

[Reserved Seat]

Hooper, who would you remove?
I was surprised Moune wasn't the POTY--he was F&M's only effective post player on a team that finished first.

[CCD3Basketball]

Hooper, who would you remove?
I was surprised Moune wasn't the POTY--he was F&M's only effective post player on a team that finished first.

I was a little surprised that Moune didn't win, but when you look at Hinnenkamp's case, you can see why he got it.....he elevated his game to over 20 points per game when Dickinson went on that win streak to end the season, and really willed that team into the playoffs.

And I don't see who you remove either...maybe Rindock? And even he had a very solid year.

Coach Kosmalski winning Coach Of The Year was good to see though.....his plan for that team finally came together this year

[Reserved Seat]

I agree with COTY

[givengo]

Hooper, who would you remove?
I was surprised Moune wasn't the POTY--he was F&M's only effective post player on a team that finished first.

Not a surprise to me.  I'd guess it could have been a close vote, but it WAS the vote of our conference coaches. POY isn't defined as best player on the team that finished first.  I think it's defined as the guy who gave coaches nightmares in every single game and regularly defied game plans, in other words THAT guy who could score, handle the ball,  see the floor for the assist, block and rebound.    Hinnenkamp played all five positions this season.  Not many 6'7 wings can do that, and do it quite the way he did.  His upside is higher than Moune's.  He was required to be a utility guy and his numbers still rose through the season, resulting in the regular season scoring title.  Probably a nightmare when it came to game plans.  His numbers could have been better in the early going but he was unselfish with young teammates, but good for him-and them.  The Devils really got it together after the learning curve and will be fierce next year.
Moune IS a really nice post player and deserves the respect he's getting.  He's not a Gerry Wixted with a step back three and all the other things that make a player multidimensional.  He's a great post player with excellent positioning, nice long arms and teammates who could get it inside.   Nice for F & M to finally get back to the dance for Moune's senior year.   And Congratulations to Coach Seretti on three straight POY's.  I'm sure other coaches in the Centennial have had that distinction, but maybe not with three different players in three successive years?   Each of those guys; Honig, Wixted, Hinnenkamp have been multidimensional and had to step outside the box for the good of the team.  Congrats to Coach Seretti,  to Ted, and to his teammates Wixted and and Honig who both preceded him in a well deserved accomplishment.

[Gabriel]

Givengo,

Try this.  Ursinus dominted POY from 2001 through 2008 as follows:
2001 Barrett
2003 Luciano
2004 Stanton
2005 McGarvey
2006 McGarvey
2007 Shattuck
2008 Shattuck

I would say that is impressive.

[Reserved Seat]

F&M
1994--Janetta
1995--Janetta
1996--Henry
2000--Kraft
2001--Kraft(shared)
2010--McNally
2011--Milligan
2012--Milligan
2013--Gyokchyan

[givengo]

Impressive  yes, but to answer my question, I'm seeing  the 2003, 04, 05 run of Luciano, Stanton and McGarvey at Ursinus matches the three different players in three years just accomplished by Dickinson.