Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Messages - Dave 'd-mac' McHugh

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 534
Middle Atlantic Region / Re: WBB: Middle Atlantic Conference
« on: Today at 11:25:47 am »
Yes... the start of the season has changed. Games now can begin as early as Nov. 8, BUT to get that passed by DIII there couldn't move the practice date up. That would have killed the proposal before it had a chance (presidents would have shut that down fast).

I'm a little surprised Nov. 8 passed as easily as it did. I felt more would like "two Fridays before Thanksgiving" than Nov. 8 hard date.

Anyway.. season now starts Nov. 8 ... though, there won't be as many games this year to be played prior to Nov. 15 because the bill was passed last January and schedules were set. Moving forward, there may be more games. Personally, I hope the week between the 8th and 15th is more of a slow build up to the season.

Multi-Regional Topics / Re: Top 25 talk
« on: Yesterday at 06:50:57 pm »
Greg - I am going to get snippy when you tell me that my argument is invalid... it's my argument, thank you. I will make it as I see fit.

And you can nitpick all you want, but the more losses I kept describing were at the top of the conference. I stated ... TOP of the conference. If you want to forget those facts and keep looking elsewhere, fine... but I'm done here.

Multi-Regional Topics / Re: Top 25 talk
« on: Yesterday at 05:01:58 pm »
Sager - I know full well what I am writing, what I am thinking, and how I want to present things.

Seriously ... I took one example of why I wanted to indicate the MIAA was down last year. A lot more losses at the top of the conference.

If you read any of the rest of my blogs, you will notice I made a comment about the ODAC not being as good at the top and thus maybe falling out of the Top 5 conferences conversation, BUT added that the depth of the conference from top to bottom could arguably keep the conference in that top five. Hint, hint ... I try not to use the same reasoning for every team or every situation. I try and keep it a bit mixed up. If that was my plan for the ODAC, it wasn't going to be my plan for the MIAA - furthermore, I don't think the MIAA was a better conference because there were more losses in the conference.

I am FULLY aware of how a conference can be deep and thus the conference can be very good. I am also fully aware that the top can come down while the bottom doesn't really improve much. That last example is where I was going with with the MIAA ... I (and MANY others) felt the top came down a bit last year and I do not feel the bottom of the conference improved itself. Thus, while you can try and make arguments for depth, I don't feel it was there for the MIAA.

That was the direction I chose. Not having two tournament teams I don't think is worth mentioning because there are a number of good (better than the MIAA) conferences who didn't have two tournament teams ... and we can start with the ODAC!

I chose one out of about half a dozen ideas for why I wanted to present the point of view. You would have chosen something else. I don't honestly care as it was my blog and I felt the shorter reason and the one that jumped out to me more than any was more conference losses for the top of the conference. Feel free to write your own blog and your own Top 25 ballot, Greg.

Northeast Region / Re: MBB: NEWMAC
« on: Yesterday at 04:56:11 pm »
In case any of you missed it... NEWMAC well represented in the Men's Preseason Top 25:

Middle Atlantic Region / Re: WBB: Middle Atlantic Conference
« on: Yesterday at 03:42:33 pm »
Yep. Oct. 15 timeline for practices has not changed ... unless a school, conference, or otherwise decides to start later.

Multi-Regional Topics / Re: Top 25 talk
« on: Yesterday at 03:41:54 pm »
I'm puzzled by this comment in your blog, Dave:

The MIAA certainly had an off year last season. Hope and Olivet tied atop the standings with four in-conference losses and Adrian and Trine finished third with six losses. Calvin was fifth with eight! You canít expect the conference to stay down for long.

I'm not following your reasoning here. How do conference W-L results indicate a league that had an "off year" or is "down"? Those games are strictly internal, and thus provide no basis for comparison to the league's previous seasons so that one could gauge whether the league was better or worse than the year before. That's what non-conference W-L results determine. After all, without fail* the MIAA finishes .500 every season in conference play. ;)

All we know about last season, unless a veteran observer eyeballed the games himself and made comparative judgments that way, was that the MIAA wasn't its traditional top-heavy self. It's not Hope and Calvin and the Six Dwarves anymore, or at least it hasn't been so in two of the past three seasons. But internal parity doesn't make a league better or worse in and of itself. In this case, it simply makes the league different from its historical norm.

* Kalamazoo's recent vacated wins due to sanctions notwithstanding.

You are overthinking it, Greg. I don't have five pages to go into why I thought the MIAA was down last year... so I used one example we don't normally see in that conference. The top teams taking a lot of losses in conference. Yeah, I could have used external results as well ... I just didn't choose to this time around.

Multi-Regional Topics / Re: Top 25 talk
« on: Yesterday at 03:40:28 pm »
My final blog is out with the final five spots on my preseason ballot:

I may or may not have quoted Titan Q :).

Is everything a trilogy nowadays?  ::) :P ;D

Just the preseason ballot. Otherwise that as one blog would have been epically long. As I said in the first one, won't do that during the season. I don't have that kind of time (don't really have that time nowadays, either).

Multi-Regional Topics / Re: Top 25 talk
« on: Yesterday at 01:15:21 pm »
My final blog is out with the final five spots on my preseason ballot:

I may or may not have quoted Titan Q :).

Multi-Regional Topics / Re: Top 25 talk
« on: October 12, 2018, 10:53:18 pm »
Iím a big fan of Grey Giovanine.  Iím not going there.

If I were an Augustana fan, I would be a big fan too.

But, I am a grudge holder and I am still upset that he managed to convince the trailing official to call an over and back from 20 feet behind the ball.

I don't know many coaches who wouldn't have tried the same. Heck, I'm guilty of the same in a soccer game knowing the ref might by me knowing the rules, maybe, better than him. LOL

Multi-Regional Topics / Re: Top 25 talk
« on: October 12, 2018, 10:19:53 pm »
Grey and I talked quite a bit the other day ... he never threatened me ... and you can see how I voted:  ;D

Men's soccer / Re: Mid-Atlantic Region
« on: October 12, 2018, 03:43:01 pm »
Excellent stuff....+k.......had no idea that the MAC shuffles teams to a point where other D3 members get frustrated...also the St.A's stuff is interesting as it seems a bit stiff to shut them out for a single press release..I have always thought a bunch of those NE-10 schools should be in its own conference in D3 like Stonehill, St. A's, St. M's, Bentley, Merrimack. Then leave the rest in D2 or like Bryant they could pursue D1 which is very costly so they probably wouldn't do it. Adelphi used to be D1 at least in Men's Soccer. I just never understood what the schools I just listed have in common with their other conference counterparts like So.Conn, New Haven, etc....

Per the MAC... the frustrations is what I have gathered. The MAC has moved schools often, but there are conferences like the USA South, ASC, and others who have a lot of members. They can move them in their divisions with no issues, but those conferences have ONE AQ even though they are huge (not advocating they get an extra bid). They see the MAC shift teams around like the Commonwealth and Freedom are divisions (which is how they were treated, officially, in their history despite two bids) and it rubs badly on those conferences and others. They think the MAC, especially with a single office and commissioner, is taking too much of an advantage of their grandfather clause.

I suspect the St. A's thing didn't come down to just the release, but I do know the paragraph existed at one point and then was deleted. Was that the one thing that did it? Probably not. Was it the straw the broke the camel's back for some? Maybe. Who knows. I didn't try and dig too much into it after it was clear St. A's didn't have a suitor in DIII anymore.

FYI Merrimack is headed to D1 now.

The biggest problem for a lot of those schools, especially St. A's, is hockey. They have programs, but there is nothing in DII for them. I thought the St. A's move would open the flood gates for more transfers to DIII. It didn't happen. I also thought, if a group of them got smart, they would come into DIII and create their own conference (as you mentioned), but that hasn't happened, either.

For the most part the commonality is proximity and such. Not much more. I have heard from plenty that they are frustrated with the NE-10 and the direction it has gone ... but they haven't pulled the trigger to do much about it.

Men's soccer / Re: Mid-Atlantic Region
« on: October 12, 2018, 03:09:52 pm »
makes sense.....jeez what a waste of a Pool B if one of these teams get it..None of these schools would ever come close to getting a Pool C otherwise and am I right that if a Pool B is used it subtracts from the total # of Pool C's?

You can look at it as a waste of a Pool B ... but if they had an AQ they are in anyway, right? It is just a different process. If there are a number of other schools in that Pool B group, maybe they don't get it and have to rely on the Pool C only.

And yes, it subtracts from the number of Pool Cs. That number is getting reduced by one whether an additional Pool B bid is provided or an additional AQ.

Anyhow....I am more curious on what you did not want to get into...When you have some time please post some schools that were rejected by different conferences...That is always a great kind of gossipy getting stuck in the weeds of D3 conversation. I remember someone posting that St.A's(NH) wanted to drop to D3 and thought it would perfectly fit nice and snug in the Newmac but were shot down by the conference. I'd love to hear a couple others preferably from schools on the East Coast.

Yeah... I can't get into it right now for a LOT of reasons (some of them include, prepping for a D1 football game and soccer game at two different campuses this weekend, grinding to get my basketball show ready for air in a few weeks, and lots of other things).

I can say this about St. A's... it appears they shot themselves in the foot. They decided to mention a number of NEWMAC schools they are "perfect" for (my wording) when they announced their decision to move to DIII. From what I was told, prior to that it was a rubber stamp for them to join the NEWMAC, but the cockiness apparently shown in the announcement when coming to DIII and calling out schools they would be a fit for didn't go over well in the NEWMAC. St. A's was contacted and told to remove the names and reference - which they did. However, the die had been cast and the NEWMAC ended up voting against St. A's joining the conference (do not know the vote tally). St. A's had to retreat to DII.

As for Harrisburg, the vote the CSAC had to make was whether to change the by-laws and accept state schools. Now, I was told by a reputable source who would know that the state-school rule would change (unrelated conversation to Harrisburg). I am not sure if the Harrisburg vote took place BEFORE that source's confidence in the state-school rule being changed or it didn't pass and that is why Harrisburg was left out of the CSAC. If it is the first option, there is a chance the CSAC will still allow state schools ... and maybe Harrisburg ends up joining after all. I think it happened the other way around and the vote that left Harrisburg out was a vote in the CSAC that squashed the idea, for now, that state schools should be in the conference.

As for other rumors and such ... I promise only one thing: I will post what I know and not spread things that are just rumors. There is too much crap that I have to wade through or gets thrown around for me to add to it. If I tell you a story, it's because I got it vetted.

For another time ...

Also, I never realized there was a financial much are we talking on average? and why does the MAC not charge it? I feel like the juicer parts of your post were left out in almost a tease like fashion and now I am curious.

I don't know the figures as each conference is different. I do know that those who left for the AEC ... some lost their "bonds" in their previous conference (i.e. the "deposit") and those tend to be five figures worth of money. However, I can't be absolutely sure about that. It can be significant enough that it does cause schools to carefully weigh their options on whether they want to pull a trigger prior to leaving or not. Stevens will be taking a financial hit for moving out of the Empire 8 and into the MAC Freedom next year, I just don't know how much.

As for the MAC not doing it ... they will tell you, publicly, that they don't believe it in because schools should want to be in their conference and remain in the MAC. I get that to some degree, but I think it has a bigger role ... they can't move schools between the Commonwealth and Freedom (as they are prone to do and is rumored if there is further expansion) if they have a fine in place. The NCAA has told the MAC they have to operate those two conferences as two difference conferences (even if they have a common office). That has been the compromise for the rest of the division who continues to get frustrated that the MAC gets two bids in a lot of sports (grandfathered in to the rule). If they had fines in place, then movement between the Commonwealth and Freedom would have to be a two-year process to make it work properly, or would require waiving the fee (which I think would further incense other DIII members), etc., etc. By not having a financial penalty in place, my belief is it allows the MAC greater freedom to move things as they need or see fit when needed.

Multi-Regional Topics / Re: Top 25 talk
« on: October 12, 2018, 02:58:04 pm »
I was a bit surprised at the Augustana #1 vote.  Let me clarify - I had Augustana #2 and I think the Vikings are easily as good as Nebraska Wesleyan.  But just seems like when the defending national champion returns this much, they are #1 until game results show otherwise.

That said, I guess it's cool one of the voters didn't just automatically pencil in NWU.

I don't think it's "cool" when they deserve it. Yeah, when a defending National Champ loses a lot of their pieces and will most likely not be as good the upcoming year, yeah, vote someone else. But, when they basically return everyone and add to that, they probably deserve a unanimous vote. To simply vote for someone else because they want to be "that guy" isn't cool at all, IMO.

To be fair, we don't know why the person voted the way they did... so not sure if they are really "that guy" or not.

And no... I do not know who the person is nor am I asking around.

Men's soccer / Re: Mid-Atlantic Region
« on: October 12, 2018, 02:36:00 pm »
Hmm seems a bit unfair to force this new conference to wait 2-3 years to get an AQ. I recognize all these teams and I am guessing they all have been longtime D3 members and in fact just looking most of them came from the same conference. Unless there is a school that is not considered a full D3 member as of yet and all these schools did was shuffle around conferences they should be allowed to get an AQ. Teams change conferences all the time without waiting 2-3 years, the only difference here is that it is a brand new conference. I suppose I could see giving the conference a full year to figure things out and get organized but 2 years seems a bit excessive especially since all these schools are dues paying members already.

The system is in place so that conferences just don't form randomly trying to grab AQs. It also makes sure schools don't jump out of conferences and form new ones just trying to find an easier avenue to the AQ because they can't do anything about it in their conference (relatively speaking).

Teams can change conferences, but for a vast majority of those conferences a school has to wait two years OR they have to pay a fine (the MAC is I think the only one in the Mid-Atlantic with no financial fine, but there is a bigger reason for that). When a school decides they want to change conferences, they have to decide if they want to be in an established conference that has an AQ or not ... they also have to be accepted into that conference. That isn't always as simple as people think. PSU Harrisburg wanted to leave the CAC for the CSAC ... they were denied and find themselves heading back to the NEAC. There are plenty of other examples of schools who want to be in conferences and are not accepted.

Furthermore, those schools already have access to the AQ in one conference. Changing conferences to one that has an AQ doesn't change that equation. For that reason, I am not sure why your comparison is thus relevant.

The biggest reason for two years is it takes about that long for things to settle down - especially for the AEC who threw this conference together in about a year's time. They only hired their commissioner a few months ago, their assistant commissioner is currently doing two jobs, their website and social media just showed up in August, etc., etc., etc.

DIII membership wants to make sure conferences are doing what they should and are reputable with good intentions before they place another AQ in the hands of a conference. That is always why they have a minimum of seven members (in good standing) for those two years. I can think of several scenarios where those two years and beyond are very unstable (ACAA currently).

BTW, if conferences LOSE members and go below the AQ benchmark for a sport, they also have two years to find new members to stabilize things before they lose the AQ. So this does work in the other direction to the benefit of conferences (see CAC next year).

BTW - it takes at least four years for a school to become a full fledged member of DIII, this is half the time. Also, Pool B exists in all sports (even those who don't have the numbers) for these type of situations. AEC has the chance at an at-large bid BEFORE the Pool C group does. AEC will most likely get a bid to the tournament in the two years they are waiting for their best team.

Men's soccer / Re: Mid-Atlantic Region
« on: October 12, 2018, 01:13:02 pm »
As stated above... there is a new conference this year (formed in a year's time) and thus that conference must earn it's AQ.

I will add, I am not sure where the AEC is considered regionally. Going through the manual, they have not listed the conference in the regional breakdown - which is odd. They do have a rep from Neumann on the men's regional committee and have that rep in the Mid-Atlantic which makes some sense for soccer (we are expecting the AEC to be in the Atlantic Region in basketball, moving several schools who used to be in the Mid-Atlantic). However, it is oddly not official for soccer as of yet.

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 534