WBB: NESCAC

[Ralph Turner]

Congrats, Amherst. Impressive performance and very deserving champions.  Those kids were the definition of focus and determination this season.  They're also the definition of champs.

PS - My theory is dead.  New England teams apparently can win the title.

But is Amherst really a New England team?  Is there a difference between New England and players from the NY/NJ area?

Considering players with double-digit minutes by region by state

From New England -- MA 20 minutes; MA 23 minutes; CT 25 minutes = 68 minutes;  22.67 min avg

From NY/NJ -- NY 10 minutes; NJ 15 minutes; NY 24 minutes; NJ 22 minutes = 71 minutes  17.75 min avg.

From the midwest -- IL 16 minutes; OH 24 minutes = 40 minutes; 20 min avg.

That makes me think that Amherst is national.  The LEC teams are much more local in nature.  

Roster for Kean Women 2010-11

Roster for Southern Maine Women 2010-11

[BBstudent]

That makes me think that Amherst is national.  The LEC teams are much more local in nature.   Smiley


I don't think Amherst, or most of the NESCAC teams, have ever thought of themselves as "local." From the Amherst web-site "Students hail from 39 states, plus D.C., PR, GU and 23 foreign countries" (https://www.amherst.edu/media/view/181593). Without putting words into anyone's mouth I think the idea of the post, and I seem to remember the same "Midwest issue" being justifiably mentioned last year, i.e., that Amherst plays in New England and the style of game and how it is officiated varies from region to region, sometimes markedly.
(One might also note that Washington University out of a roster of twenty, has only four girls from MO, two from KS but also several from NY, NJ and CT as well as one from CA, so it also feels somewhat "national".)
Moreover, there seems to be no getting around the fact that Midwest teams, whether because of a particular style or familiarity with how the games will be called, have been extremely successful at the national level and in winning NCAA championships - I think the post was merely emphasizing that teams that play very few games in the Midwest may be at a disadvantage in March and until they prove themselves the odds favor betting against them.

[gordonmann]

I know Amherst has that statement on its website -- many colleges do -- but I still consider it a New England school.  Definitely different from other schools in the northeast, but still a New England school.  the players who logged significant minutes tonight were from Guilford, CT; Newton, MA; Holmdel, NJ; East Setauket, NY; Walpole, MA; Cincinnatti, OH: Cortland, NY; and Chicago. The coach is from Deerfield, MA.  Only two of 7 players are from outside the region I generally consider the northeast. I don't mean northeast as the NCAA defines but rather northeastern quadrant of the country.

[Ralph Turner]

I know Amherst has that statement on its website -- many colleges do -- but I still consider it a New England school.  Definitely different from other schools in the northeast, but still a New England school.  the players who logged significant minutes tonight were from Guilford, CT; Newton, MA; Holmdel, NJ; East Setauket, NY; Walpole, MA; Cincinnatti, OH: Cortland, NY; and Chicago. The coach is from Deerfield, MA.  Only two of 7 players are from outside the region I generally consider the northeast. I don't mean northeast as the NCAA defines but rather northeastern quadrant of the country.

Thanks for the comment...

Then do I understand you to consider the NJAC in that same "northeast" region?

How far south and west does your "northeast" region extend?  

A related question...for my edification.

How much different is the style of play in NJAC and the Mid-Atlantic from New England?  Thanks.

[amh63]

Earlier, I posted that I had some issues with Gordon Mann concerning his views of regional teams/players winning the big one.
Yes it was a bit of carry over from last year pointed out by BBstudent's post.  I had decided to not bring it up especially after Amherst won the big one last night and Mr. Mann acknowledge his "mistake" to a degree. However, the issues of regional teams/players chances of success have, IMO, come up again.  I will put my "two cents" in again and probably more in the debate.  Here goes.
 The discussions of last year covered regions, style of play, players, coaches, referees, etc., etc.  One cannot argue against the fact that the "midwest" teams have a history of winning the national championships.  Mr. Mann's opinions, I believe, are built on years of watching games, etc.  and I respect his knowledge and opinions in general.  However, I do believe that his views do have flaws.  We all are human and have our bias, etc.
First, I do not believe that any "regions" have a hold on talented coaches.  The style of play is a "red herring", IMO.  Good coaches will often adjust their preferred style of play with the talent on hand.
Second, talented players are recruited from all states/regions.  The NESCAC and the UAA are two conferences that have players year in and year out from many regions.  Admission criteria is more of a problem in "recruiting" than players' home towns.
The central issue that I believe that has not been discussed here enough and that analyst like Gordonmann has overlooked in his evaluation of WBB teams is the college WBB programs differences by regions.
What I mean is that the WBB programs run by the central/midwest schools that have had a history of success are "stronger".
Let me explain further before I get killed here.  Schools like Hope, Calvin, Wash. U , and Ill. Wes. have put WBB high in their priority of sports in their athletic programs.   Like Kenyon College in swimming....they dominate D3 swimming.
If you check the rooster size of Wash. U. and Ill. Wes. you see 20 plus players.  The NE schools rarely have teams over 15 players.  No matter what you think, Wash. U . has on their website, at least four asst. coaches, though only one is given in bold type.  How many were hovered around the Wash. U. coach last night during game stoppage.  Some of the schools have the ability of playing grad. students and "red-shirted" players that were injured.   In short, there are programs that have put more emphasis on BB.  Good for them.  Good for the fine facilities built.  I just want to point out that the programs that are in place are the key difference in regions......not the players, coaches, referees, style of play.
To you, Gordon, I say, open your mind to your Triad Theory and to your bias to the size of a player.  You pointed out in your comments on the Jan. Hoopsville broadcast that you preferred athletic players that could play defense, shoot outside, etc.  Last night, Amherst's starting point guard proved you wrong.  She led the 2nd half charge with two 3-point shots,  hustle and defense.  She holds the steal record at Amherst and is often the key to her team's offense as well as making key rebounds.  She is athletic, talented and  has the drive and leadership to win games...even critical games.  

[jaybird44]

I hope you are not insinuating that Wash-U neglects academics in favor of making sure its basketball program remains successful.  I'm told that the university doesn't recruit players who score less than a 30 on the ACT.  For those of you who haven't taken the ACT, a 30 is an exceptional score.  That is climbing a mountain in rarified air, very near the summit of perfection.  I thought I did well when I scored a 21 on it many, many moons ago.  So, on that point, don't imply that Wash-U recruits players that can't spell "cat" by spotting them the "c" and the "t". 

Secondly, if you are still seething about the eligibility of Jaimie McFarlin, the Most Outstanding Player of last year's Final Four, just because she was granted a 5th season via a red-shirt situation...well, you need to take that up with the NCAA.  It gave McFarlin and Sean Wallis 5th seasons because they lost nearly all of a season due to injury.  Go take your troubles and put them on the NCAA's doorstep.

Amherst certainly deserves its newly-won national championship.  The Lord Jeffs played exceptional defense and made some gutsy shots to earn the title.  But, don't try and sully Wash-U's championship last season with subtle and flawed innuendo, while you celebrate Amherst's.  That dog won't hunt or even get off the porch.

[Hoosier Titan]

I hope you are not insinuating that Wash-U neglects academics in favor of making sure its basketball program remains successful.

It is definitely true, as well, that student athletes at Illinois Wesleyan must meet the academic requirements of the university.  I'm not sure that is what amh implied by saying that Wash U and IWU "put more emphasis on BB", but relaxed academic standards are definitely not a part of that emphasis (if it exists).  The IWU seniors this year whose plans I know about have been accepted to graduate schools in veterinary science, physical therapy, and clinical psychology (two).

The large rosters include JV players.  I am not sure how this translates to "more support for basketball," since athletic scholarships are not an issue in division III.

And medical redshirts--well, agreed, take it up with the NCAA.  Christina Solari, an All-American for IWU last season, lost her first season to an ACL injury in her first game.  She would have been eligible for a redshirt but chose to graduate and get on with life.  More power to her--and more power to Sean Wallis and Jamie McFarlin for their decisions to play an extra year. 

Having been born in Indiana, educated in New York, lived in Boston for 20 years, and now moved to Illinois (and having watched basketball in all of them), I have to say I find this discussion about regions pretty irrelevant.  I took Gordon's original comment as a simple statement that, in his experience, most NCAA champions have come out of either the Great Lakes or the Central Region (were those the two regions, Gordon?).  I figured that would be an easy statement of fact to check.  It was one person's opinion, anyway.

And, for what it's worth, Amherst was IMO far and away the best team in this Final Four.  Everyone deserved to be there, but the Lord Jeffs were excellent in every phase of the game:  rebounding, defense, running their game plan even when things looked to be going against them.  They had chances to fold in both games and they didn't.  Bravo to them for a well-earned championship.

[amh63]

jaybird44....calm down and step back.
First, Both the UAA and NESCAC schools are among the top rated colleges in the country.  Their students and BB players are recruited from around the world and their schools share the "problem" of academic qualifications applying equally to all applicants.  The comments I made was general in nature to the conferences and not specifically to particular schools.
My comments wrt particular school programs again were to point out that school programs in WBB have over the years been established that lead to success.   Like the swimming programs at Kenyon that have led to numerous championships; like the squash teams at Trinity College in CT....etc.like the Div.1 WBB program in Tenn....etc.   Such schools all have done such under what ever rules/criteria you want to state.  Good for them!   My point is that differences in established programs in different regions in the game of BB should be considered in evaluation of regional chances in the big dance.  If a school can use its graduate school to allow players to play and the student wishes, so be it.  If a school wants to keep teams of 10 players, 15 players or 25 players, so be it....if a conference has a "JV" program to help develop players, so be it.  The point to be made is that there are noted differences in programs.  Schools in D3 midwest regions play in large new areas where BB is given special emphasis, IMO,  In the NESCAC, the "gyms" vary greatly in age and size.  The ice hockey sites often are newer and seat more fans throughout the northeast.
Enough said.    

[Ralph Turner]

I hope you are not insinuating that Wash-U neglects academics in favor of making sure its basketball program remains successful.

It is definitely true, as well, that student athletes at Illinois Wesleyan must meet the academic requirements of the university.  I'm not sure that is what amh implied by saying that Wash U and IWU "put more emphasis on BB", but relaxed academic standards are definitely not a part of that emphasis (if it exists).  The IWU seniors this year whose plans I know about have been accepted to graduate schools in veterinary science, physical therapy, and clinical psychology (two).

The large rosters include JV players.  I am not sure how this translates to "more support for basketball," since athletic scholarships are not an issue in division III.

And medical redshirts--well, agreed, take it up with the NCAA.  Christina Solari, an All-American for IWU last season, lost her first season to an ACL injury in her first game.  She would have been eligible for a redshirt but chose to graduate and get on with life.  More power to her--and more power to Sean Wallis and Jamie McFarlin for their decisions to play an extra year. 

Having been born in Indiana, educated in New York, lived in Boston for 20 years, and now moved to Illinois (and having watched basketball in all of them), I have to say I find this discussion about regions pretty irrelevant.  I took Gordon's original comment as a simple statement that, in his experience, most NCAA champions have come out of either the Great Lakes or the Central Region (were those the two regions, Gordon?).  I figured that would be an easy statement of fact to check.  It was one person's opinion, anyway.

And, for what it's worth, Amherst was IMO far and away the best team in this Final Four.  Everyone deserved to be there, but the Lord Jeffs were excellent in every phase of the game:  rebounding, defense, running their game plan even when things looked to be going against them.  They had chances to fold in both games and they didn't.  Bravo to them for a well-earned championship.

Women's Playoffs

# 2002 UW-Stevens Point   WIAC      Central
# 2003 Trinity, Texas         SCAC      South       
# 2004 Wilmington             OAC       Great Lakes
# 2005 Millikin                   CCIW      Central
# 2006 Hope                     MIAC      Great Lakes
# 2007 DePauw                 SCAC      Great Lakes  (DPU is the only member of the SCAC from the Great Lakes Region.)
# 2008 Howard Payne         ASC       South
# 2009 George Fox             NWC       West
# 2010 Washington U.        UAA        Central
# 2011 Amherst                NESCAC    Northeast

[Hoosier Titan]

Thanks, Ralph!

[jaybird44]

I don't think I need to calm down.  I merely pointed out a couple of statements that you made, which seemed to have a bit of unfair criticism attached to them.  You even prefaced them by stating "Let me explain before I get killed here."  So, if you knew that someone may call you on those statements, why make them?

Regarding the number of coaches or players on a roster...who cares if there are 10 players or 24 on a roster?  And, if you can have a lot of assistant coaches, so be it.  What is wrong with that, as long as you are within the NCAA guidelines?  You make it sound as if Amherst and other schools in your region are somehow getting the shaft because of some sort of nefarious cloak-and-dagger derring-do among schools in the central part of the U.S. and the NCAA.  If you want more coaches, get more coaches.  Nobody is standing in your way.  You want more players on the roster, put 'em on there. 

Better yet, just relax and enjoy your well-deserved national championship.  Those are very fleeting and not guaranteed "a priori" from year to year.  Savor it...don't tarnish the enjoyment by pointing subtle fingers of unfair criticism regarding other successful programs.

It's not just me that feels that way...evidently Hoosier Titan picked up on your tome, too...

[NH NESCAC Fan]

Wow.  You are all quite passionate about your opinions relative to the various conferences, and programs, players, coaches and regions, and I applaud you all for your passion.  I am posting this comment as a relative newcomer fan of DIII women's college basketball, and if you'll indulge me I'd like to throw out a few observations.  Please take them from where they are delivered, and understand that I don't really have a dog in this fight...so to speak.

What I have seen this season while watching many of the Amherst games online, and knowing one of the players on the team very well, is a group of young women that have been incredibly committed to doing the absolute best that they could on the basketball court, and in the classroom, since last summer.  I have seen good games, and I have seen bad games, but I have never seen games where the ladies on both sides weren't trying their hardest. (and no one here has suggested anything else)

Many of these young ladies had opportunities for athletic scholarships at either DI or DII schools.  Some went that route and determined that while the basketball aspect was fine the academic aspect was lacking, and decided to upgrade the academic side and forego the scholarship.  They play the game because they love the game.  They come from all over the country to attend all of these schools, and who really cares where they are from anyway?  Once they are at the school they are representatives of that school and they represent them all very well.

I enjoy watching the games not because of the quality of the basketball, but for the passion that the ladies bring to the games, and knowing what they have had to sacrifice to play a game that they love.  I think oftentimes we as fans lose sight of the bigger picture.  The Lord Jeffs deserve all of the praise that is being directed at them, and Wash U deserved the same last year.  Whoever prevails next year will deserve it as well.  It is a very long season.  They all play by the same rules, injuries happen, bad officiating happens, shots get missed half of the time.  You win, you lose...you play your best.  You congratulate the victor, and console the loser at the end of the game.  Now they all get to enjoy a month and a half of being normal college kids before it all starts up again.

Congratulations to all who left it all out there on the court.

I've forgotten the reason for writing this, but it is so long I feel compelled to hit the submit button!  :-)

[gordonmann]

Ralph:

I define the northeast as DC through Maine. For Division III basketball, it encompasses the Northeast, East, Mid Atlantic and Atlantic. Yes, I consider the NJAC schools to be northeast.  I guess the CAC is the farthest south I'd go and mid-Pennsylvania is the farthest west, which sort of splits the AMCC schools.

As for regional dominance, you have to go farther back than 2002 to get the full flavor. You'll find champions from UW-Eau Claire, Capital (two of them), Washington U (four more of them), Hope, etc. The Central and Great Lakes regions have more then their share. And notice which region put two teams in the Final Four this year.  Some of that is how the brackets are put together, but not all of it.

Amh63:

I'm glad you shared your opinions.  And I agree with almost all of them.  I'm also quite fallible so feel free to disagree at will.

I don't think the coaching talent is concentrated outside New England. There are some outstanding coaches in that area - Gromacki, Fifield at Southern Maine, Yosinoff at Emmanuel, etc. You could also include Shea (Salem State) and Pemper (Bowdoin) until very recently.

I think the Central and Great Lakes have won more titles because their elite teams generally have depth at forward and larger guards. Amherst proved me wrong in some ways this year.  They definitely broke my geographic bias. When I asked Gromacki after the game what he identified as his biggest needs to win a title, he jokingly replied, "Size and depth because that's what some guy wrote on D3hoops.com."  While Finucane was a part of last night's victory, notice who played point guard most of the first half - six-foot Jackie Renner.  And then, when Atanga McCormick and Leyman got in foul trouble, Renner played forward.  She's a real nice weapon and one Amherst didn't have a couple years ago. But you're right - size doesn't reign supreme and it's fair to criticize me for focusing on it too much. Finucane did a great, great job running the offense in the second half.  She has been a huge part of Amherst's turn around.

I also agree with what I interpret as your general point that the schools with highly successful individual programs are the ones who have the desire and the resources to work toward that end. It's not a direct cause-and-effect.  You can make the commitment and still not win a title. Players still have to make plays, coaches have to work with talent they have and all the unpredictability that makes sports so much fun still apply. But it's hard to be consistently excellent without commitment from the broader institution.  Coaches and players always want to win and will work toward that end.  But their institutions have to be working toward that same goal.  That means allocating money for great venues, larger coaching staffs and (in some sports) bigger rosters.

I did notice the size of the Wash U and IWU rosters and the number of assistants on Wash U's bench.  We mentioned it in our broadcasts last year and this year.  To me, that indicates an institutional commitment to the sport. Maybe it's just coincidental or players wanting to play for winners.  If you look in other sports, like Division III football, there's often a direct correlation between the elite schools (Mount Union, Mary Hardin-Baylor, Wesley, etc) and their roster size. Of course there are exceptions to the rule both ways. But if you spend time around a program like Mount Union football or Hope basketball, you realize they have made the commitment to that program that others have not or cannot. Gromacki told me that, one of the reasons he wanted to come to Amherst was the Athletic Director told him there was a commitment to winning there. Commitment + resources + great players + great coaches = excellence

Incidentally, while it gets obscured in a sports forum, I also think it's okay for schools to decide they don't want to make the commitment. If a school decides it wants to focus its athletic resources on another program - or not on sports at all - that's completely okay with me. If the key leaders at Kenyon or the broader community decides it wants to commit more resources to swimming than other schools, great.  If Trinity wants to do the same with squash, awesome...though I'd have more fun as a Trin alum if they won some hoops titles.

To take it a step further, if a school decides it wants to invest its time, talents, energy and money building another part of the school - something completely unrelated to sports - that's fine with me, too.

The primary mission for these places isn't to win athletic events anyway.

[Ralph Turner]

Gordon, thanks for the insight on "northeastern" basketball.  You would give us three geographic areas of basketball, the Northeast, the "Midwest" and the periphery, the South Region and west coast.

I was particularly impressed with George Fox.  They found another gear in the Louisiana College game at Chapman.  To beat UWSP at Quandt and then to come so close to IWU is remarkable.  It appears that GFU has re-loaded with new head coach Michael Meeks.

I went with a 10-year history because the ASC and the NWC weren't Pool A members until 2001.  You have three champions in the last 10 years from the peripheral conferences, SCAC, ASC and NWC.  (DePauw goes to the NCAC in 2011-12.)

[gordonmann]

Sure.

Totally agree on George Fox.  I was also impressed by how Howard Payne closed the season.  Is it safe to say the Yellow Jackets have crossed the threshold from star burst sensation under Coach Kielsmeier to sustained national contender?