MBB: Northwest Conference

[UPSoundLogs]

Geez, it does look like we are in for a talent up grade from last year!  If what you guys are saying is correct then the league should be stacked.

NWCer-
im really not sure about UPS's incoming freshman for this season, i have heard that they are excited about  2-3 sophmores who didnt hardly play as freshman.  One of them is a big guy that I'm told is a lot like McVey from a couple years back...except with some actual basketball skills.  That would help a lot because last years biggest weakness was on the boards and needing some power inside.  I know Foster and Krauel have also beefed up since last year so the loggers should be pretty rugged in the paint. 

...also, its too bad about Nugent from WU, i thought he was gonna be really good and entertaining to watch. 

Rat-
I forgot about Symes, honestly i wasnt that impressed with him when i saw him(maybe just an off night) but he can score and he will be about the only returning impact player with some NWC experience for the bucs.  Im sure WW will be tough as always.

[(509)Rat]

...also, its too bad about Nugent from WU, i thought he was gonna be really good and entertaining to watch.

Straight from the rumor mill...Nugent is down in Cali this season playing some JuCo ball (possibly at Delta).  Sounds like it was academic problems that stemmed from last semester/quarter.  Anyways, looks like the conference title is once again (although it was kind of a surprise last year) gonna be a three dog race.

[NWCer]

Thanks 509, not good news for Willamette, or the conference, the better players that are in the league, the better for the league overall I say.

Wouldn't count Pacific out of the race just yet, may want to think about making it a 4 dog race, although the history is not there like it is on Palatine Hill, in Tacoma, or Spokane, but I think this may be the year Lowry breaks them through, just a prediction I'm throwing out there based on hearsay about their transfers and a solid core of returners.

Why is there only 3 playoff spots in the tourney anyway, does anyone have any insight on that?  Wouldn't it make sense just to have a round figure like 4?

Crazy early-loose-non committal-in good fun predictions:

1st and 2nd to LC and UPS (any order)
3rd and 4th to Whitworth and Pacific (any order)
5th and 6th to PLU and Willamette (any order)
Linfield, Fox, and Whitman in the bottom 3rd (any order)

will make more solid predictions when we hear more recruiting news and see some rosters, but maybe this will liven the board up...........

[(509)Rat]

Makin it a 4 team tourney gives no reward to the conference champ...other than you get to play the #4 seed, which in the last few years wouldn't have been much of a reward 

[NWCer]

I hear your point 509.  Three is more favorable for the champ, but having no tourney at all is the ultimate situation for the champ, just playing devils advocate - but why should they have to play in the conference tourney for a spot in the NCAA's when they just proved over a 16 game season that they are the best team?  Valid position, BUT - I like seeing the tourney, and with more teams, although you can easily see why the champ wouldn't.

[(509)Rat]

Don't worry NWCer, I'm all for open disussion, new ideas, etc.  Much like a scientist, I tend to question what some call "truth" and attempt to find the flaws in it, simply for the purpose of advancing thought...so how about this explanation.  If you have the best cpnferene record in the NWC you are "rewarded" with a bye and a home game in the conference championship.  Now, thanks to the strong play of previous Whitworth and UPS teams, the NWC is generally regarded as a good conference whose top teams are able to compete on the national level.  By having the conference championship you give your conference the best chance of sending multiple teams to the national tourney by allowing them to play a few extra games, one most often against a nationally ranked team.  So you are right that the Ultimate reward for the team w/ the best record at the end of the regular season is an automatic conference championship, but if you are an AD at an NWC school, on a committee deciding how post season play is determined...you've got not only your team, but the rest of your conference in mind when making the decision. 

[NWCer]

Always up for questioning truth.......

I hear you about best chance to get 2 in, but hear this point: If the NWC champ has a great year and falls in the conference tourney and a team who got hot at the end sneaks in the 3rd slot and wins the conference tourney then they are shipped out to play Wisconsin whoever in the first round on Thursday night and the NWC is gone by Friday morning, because it's most likely that the regular season champ doesn't get an invite (when's the last time NWC had 2 invites?).  On the other hand, sending the regular season champ every time you are sending your best team and as UPS did a couple times, they're at home and with a bye and one win from the sweet 16, better for our conference...........

Sounds like a solid argument, with that said, I still like the tourney

Your right, the administrators have to do what is best for the conference as a whole, not your own institution, but I guess the question is, what's right??  4 team tourney, 3 team tourney, no tourney?

[(509)Rat]

(when's the last time NWC had 2 invites?)

probably the same year that the NWC tourney champ wasn't the #1 seed    .  Thats actually true...In 97-98 when Whitworth was the regular season champ, they lost to UPS in the first round of a 4 team conference tourney (bad for #1 seed Whitworth) and LC went on to win the tourney.  Guess who went to the playoffs???  Both LC and Whitworth did.  Ever since that season the regular season conference champ has won the conference tourney (probably thanks to the 3-team setup).

[NWCer]

509,

but what about since the NWC has been Division III...................

I believe the NWC was still NAIA at that time, correct?

[Gregory Sager]

509,

but what about since the NWC has been Division III...................

I believe the NWC was still NAIA at that time, correct?

Correct. The first March in which the NWC participated in the D3 tournament was 2000.

[NWCer]

That's right Sager, LC and Pacific both went that year, and I call myself a Boxer supporter

Has there been any changes to the region since that time, as far as berths to the tourney, or did two of our teams make it basically under the same "system" that is in place now?

[UPSoundLogs]

You'll have to forgive me, I'm not really a NWC history buff so I can't  help in answering these questions .  But, just out of curiousity, was our league as a whole more competitive on a national level back when we were in the NAIA or now when we are in NCAA D3?  I know that WW had some serious success in the 90's, but how was the rest of the league back in the NAIA days? 

Anybody know?

[NWCer]

Logs, same as you, my history of this league only goes back several years, but I do know that Willamette won a national championship back in 1993 and I think that LC made a bunch of deep runs in the 90's, I would guess that as an NAIA league overall the NWC's reputation was greater than it is now as D3.  LC made that elite 8 run back in 02, and then UPS in 06 as D3 members, but those probably don't match the number of deep runs the league made as NAIA members, the length of membership probably plays a part in that.

[Gregory Sager]

That's right Sager, LC and Pacific both went that year, and I call myself a Boxer supporter

Has there been any changes to the region since that time, as far as berths to the tourney, or did two of our teams make it basically under the same "system" that is in place now?

The tourney selection process has been somewhat modified since 2000, in that the pools system now dictates that a specified number of berths have to be set aside for so-called Pool B teams: Independents and teams from conferences that don't have automatic bids. And there are a larger number of conferences that have automatic bids now than there were seven years ago. Conversely, the number of entrants in the tourney has been expanded from 48 to 59 teams.

Logs, same as you, my history of this league only goes back several years, but I do know that Willamette won a national championship back in 1993 and I think that LC made a bunch of deep runs in the 90's, I would guess that as an NAIA league overall the NWC's reputation was greater than it is now as D3.  LC made that elite 8 run back in 02, and then UPS in 06 as D3 members, but those probably don't match the number of deep runs the league made as NAIA members, the length of membership probably plays a part in that.

I think that a lot of it might have to do with the differences between D3 and the two NAIA divisions. I'm not sure, but my guess is that the NWC was an NAIA-2 league when it was a part of that organization. NAIA-1 is better overall than D3 -- judging by the head-to-head results between NAIA-1 and D3 that're compiled daily every season on this site by poster Rhodes Scholar, the former division seems to fall somewhere between the NCAA's D2 and D3 in terms of overall strength. But D3 is overall slightly better than NAIA-2, although (as with NAIA-1, and D3 itself for that matter) there's often wide variances from one part of the country to another with regard to the caliber of play within that division. Schools that are recent converts from NAIA-2 to D3 haven't exactly torn up D3, although the WIAC (most of which converted from NAIA-2 to D3 in the early '90s) is a conspicuous exception.

Keep in mind as well that both NAIA-1 and NAIA-2 are much, much smaller than D3. NAIA-1 only has 99 participating schools, and NAIA-2 only has 151. D3 had close to 400 schools that fielded men's basketball teams last season.

[UPSoundLogs]

NWCer-

It looks like you have had a better NWC history lesson than me, thanks for the run down.  You probably have a point in that the length of membership probably plays a part in our leagues NCAA D3 success...hopefully we will have more success like LC and UPS have had in recent years!

GS-

Thanks for the insight on the differences between D3 and NAIA.  Although I have to say, having played against and watched the best from both D3 and NAIA 1, in my opinion the best D3 teams are superior to the best NAIA 1 teams.  For example, the top teams from the WIAC and CCIW(D3) are better than the top teams from the GSAC(NAIA 1).   Although the quality through the 400 D3 teams is certainly not at the same level as the 99 NAIA 1 teams....just my personal observation .