WBB: NESCAC

[pureshooter]

 i figured bowdoin would win easy. unless bates pulls the upset, don't think bowdoin will lose within the nescac tournament.

[speedy]

This was a real thumping:

Bowdoin 78 Bates 47

[feces monkey]

Oh, the humanity.

After playing relatively poorly offensively on Friday night (and still winning by 19), Bowdoin hangs the worst loss on Bates in the past 20 years of the rivalry. And with the men's team also losing to Bowdoin, they're going to have to start collecting belts and shoelaces in Lewiston.

Tournament shook out as expected. Williams needs to get to the semis to assure an at-large bid, and that will likely do it for the conference.

All-conference honors:

First Team
Flaherty, Bowdoin
Miller, Williams
Cox, Trinity
Barton, Bates
Anelauskas, Bowdoin

Second Team
Krah, Tufts
Cummings, Bowdoin
Beckwith, Bates
Stetson, Williams
Fourney, Wesleyan

Wow, that was surprisingly difficult. The league coaches tend to go with seniors and having the better teams represented. This is the team I would go with, although I think Kostakis will bump Anelauskas, and Anelauskas will bump Fourney off the second team. It's kind of wrong that Bates would get two on the first team, but there is a tendency to reward "time served."

Tufts coach earned coach of year, but Pemper will likely get it. Flaherty is a lock for POY. Not many impact freshman, so it will likely go to one of the bottom-feeders (Card, Tri; Frazer, CC; or Cappelloni, Col).

[remsleep]

This probably should be posted in the "General Issues" area but I decided that putting it here would be most appropriate because of how erudite the NESCAC crowd is.
All of my Bowdoin, Amherst,etc acquaintances assumed that readers from the other conferences probably wouldn't be able to stick with an article this lengthy so best to post it where it will be fully read and comprehended.
Anyhow, from today's Times:  http://www.nytimes.com/2007/02/13/sports/othersports/13ncaa.html

[feces monkey]

Rem,

I first heard about the concept of breaking up DIII in 1996 when the NCAA created a committee to examine the premise. Many of the issues rehashed by the Times article -- this is a pretty old concept, and one that has been covered before -- are the ones the original committee ran up against. The Annapolis Group also briefly touched on this subject but found athletics to be too dirty a subject for their "erudite" minds to be bothered with.

The crux of the Times article:

"One division would require institutions to play a large number of sports, perhaps as many as 18, and would restrict athletic departments in the sensitive areas of recruiting, the lengths of playing seasons and number of off-season practices. The other division would be more permissive in its recruiting, practice and competition rules, and require as few as 6 to 10 sports so that members could more easily focus on high-profile sports."

The first sentence is essentially verbatim from the NESCAC handbook. And if you think back to pre-1993, the NESCAC was D4. The second sentence is basically your large public schools (ex: the Wisconsin franchises) with their redshirts, non-traditional seasons, and tiny offerings.

I've honestly been waiting for the pendulum to swing back toward the Dark Ages in the NESCAC for quite some time. Shortly after the elmination of the ECACs (2001 maybe?), I thought the conference was going to opt to allow just the AQ to accept an NCAA bid in each sport (no Pool Cs) but a cabal of school presidents did not let that happen. And I don't foresee it happening anytime soon.

There might be a move from a couple of the NESCAC-chasing conferences (Centennial, UAA, SCAC) to get in line with the D4 concepts espoused by the NESCAC, like eliminating non-traditional season, reining in recruiting, etc., but I don't see an official split in D3 coming anytime soon. If the NESCAC, as a whole, cannot agree upon solution, there won't be one on a national level.

[nescac hoops]

anybody have any predictions for this weekend? i think i feel an upset in the making. amherst has already shown that they are able to beat the bobcats, but it will be a much harder task up in lewiston this time. i think midd could easily catch tufts off-guard and i have been surprised that midd hasn't been better this year. that being said, i think they have some talent that is capable of taking down the jumbos. i think williams is better than wesleyan but it's always tough to beat a team for the third time in a season, not to mention that the two teams played last week. aside from the bowdoin/trinity game, i think it should be a pretty interesting weekend. we'll see...

[papabear]

Aside from the Trinity / Bowdoin game? I think Trinity has a shot to knock of the Polar bears. Sarah Cox has played well lately, and Bowdoin has really been sloppy in their last two contests. Flaherty needs to play like an All American, too much inconsistency, and free throws have been very problematic of late. Clearly the best team in the Northeast/ country, with one of the best five players in the country but they need to play better or they will get knocked out early in NCAA'S.

[frank uible]

The smart money doesn't buy the proposition that having beaten a team twice in a season causes beating it a third time to be more difficult.

[feces monkey]

Overall, I agree with papabear.

I think Tufts will beat Middlebury by a wider margin than Bowdoin over Trinity. Bates will win comfortably, likely by 12+. Wesleyan-Williams is the game of the weekend. The Lady Ephs should be a no-brainer, but they just don't inspire confidence right now. Regardlesss, I'll take -- as Frank Uible would say -- the "Broads from Billsville."

[frank uible]

Did I ever say that? I don't think so but wish I had.

[pureshooter]

 bowdoin beat trinity by 15 on the road, i think they'll be better this time around. williams-wesleyan should be good. did williams underachieve a bit this year? only saw them play once.

[feces monkey]

Of course, Bobcat Broads has a better, and also alliterative, ring to it than Lady Bobcats.

My mistake. I just remembered B's.

[whoarewebobcats]

Saw the Bates/Amherst game...Bates won relatively comfortably, double digits. It was close throughout the first half (my grandpa on their performance: "It was like they found a new way to turn the ball over each possession") and Murphy pulled Sarah twice to settle her down (and then had an aneurysm over something she did on the second half, even though they were up 15). Matia did a bunch of good little things, on the floor for the ball, hustling a lot. Maggie and Katie really played well--I'm continually impressed with how much they both have improved. My girl Lauren Yanofsky did a bunch of good things but it didn't show up much in the box score (the box score is crazy...Sarah went 11/8/6 with 6 TOs, Katie led the team in scoring (hit 5 threes)). The funniest moment of the afternoon came when Murphy wanted the team to run the clock out with about two minutes left and Maggie was wide open for three with about 20 seconds left on the shot clock, and let it go, and Murphy started to yell "Maggie!" all disgustedly, and the ball rolled in and he dropped his head and smiled. They pulled away early in the second half...I think Amherst only scored 2 points for the first 6 or 8 minutes of the 2nd half while Bates just piled it on. Sarah, Lauren, and Val were excellent passers throughout the game (the 6 TOs are obviously troubling for Sarah [including one that literally did go into the stands, nescac hoops ], but they mostly came in the first eight minutes, she really settled down and played an excellent game thereafter). They looked pretty good, a little streaky, but overall good. Amherst looked lousy...I didn't see a whole lot of good things that they did, except that they seemed to be excellent three point shooters and their PG on the bench (no. 13) was very quick and creative (but small). I've never seen a player rely on illegal activity as much as Amherst's no. 21 (Swensen, I think her name was), who committed about a dozen illegal screen, and pushed every player she screened, rebounded against, or went by. It was pretty impressive how much she got away with, but also kind of unbelievable that their coach encourages such play. All in all a nice afternoon at Alumni, even though it was basically empty while the school was on break.

[feces monkey]

my grandpa on their performance: "It was like they found a new way to turn the ball over each possession"

If the NCAA was ever going to devise a comprehensive marketing slogan for Division III women's basketball, a la the NBA's "It's FANtastic" campaign, this would likely be it. With an exclamation point.

Sarah Cox has played well lately, and Bowdoin has really been sloppy in their last two contests. Flaherty needs to play like an All American, too much inconsistency, and free throws have been very problematic of late. Clearly the best team in the Northeast/ country, with one of the best five players in the country but they need to play better or they will get knocked out early in NCAA'S.

Papabear pretty much described the Polar Bears win over Trinity, and he wrote it mid-week. An underwhelming effort, to say the least, for Bowdoin. The Bantams were probably one of three teams in the conference against whom the Polar Bears could give such a performance and get away with it. I want to be clear that I don't think it's a matter of effort; the shots just weren't falling. With that said, I think it was pretty clear from January on that Bowdoin would only go as far as its defense would take it.

As predicted, the Jumbos coasted comfortably. Congrats to the Ephs for clinching a Pool C bid with their 20th win. It will interesting see what version of the this mercurial Williams team the East Region sees in the tourney. Bates at home against a mediocre team -- the results were predictable.

[nescac hoops]

Congrats to the Ephs for clinching a Pool C bid with their 20th win. It will interesting see what version of the this mercurial Williams team the East Region sees in the tourney.

feces,
i was up in williamstown this weekend to watch the men's and women's game. i was only able to see half the women's game but, in talking to people, i don't think they see themselves getting in if they were to lose next weekend. obviously, the committee may think differently but many surrounding the ephs don't think they have had the season/wins that they had the year before to get in with a pool c bid unless they have under their belts like bowdoin. last year, EVERY team they lost to made it to the tourny. this year they have lost to teams like salem st., tufts, bates, etc. who will probably not make the tourny unless there is a major upset. last year they also had wins against tourny teams like wesleyan, bates, springfield etc.. wesleyan, springfield, bates were ranked when they beat them last year (or receiving votes). this year they have yet to get a defining win....or atleast that's what a lot of people think up in williamstown. i don't really understand pool c pick all the time but i think that the ephs would do better in the tourny than a lot of other NE pool c contenders...norwich. i'm also sligtly skeptical about a team like framingham st. but their record is very strong. i think the ephs need favorites to win their respective conferences and for the committee to take into account how well they did in the tourny last year to get in. obviously, i think if the ephs can't beat bowdoin this weekend to advance and get a good win under their belts then they have a VERY strong shot of getting in with a win like that.