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 - AndOne

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 217
1
bbfan44----

Perhaps Professor Sager or another of our learned posters might care to elaborate a bit, but basically there is no letter of intent in D3.

You don't sign anything, certainly not any standardized form. Commitments in D3 are verbal in nature. Also, unlike D1, the verbal commitment is non-binding. You can verbally commit to one school on day, and to another the next day. There is no penalty for changing your mind.   

Furthermore "signings" are usually nowhere near the elaborate affair portrayed in the article ("signed his letter of intent to play basketball (at EC) Thursday night in front of a large contingent of family, friends, and coaches.") Aside from not signing anything, D3 commitments are usually simply made by means of a recruit calling the head coach and advising him he has chosen the coach's school. Furthermore, many schools don't make an announcement of the "commitment" until after a tuition deposit has been received.

Lastly, a coach can never be 100% sure he is getting a kid until the kid shows up at the first day of official practice in October.

2
Thanks to our never ending winter and yesterday's snow, today's NCC game @ down the street neighbor Benedictine, has already been postponed. No makeup date set yet.

3
IWU just lost an Illinois Class 2A recruit to Div. II McKendree College.

Details, man, details!
Some hotshot who didn't want to start out as a 4th stringer on the Green Team?
Details.  :)

4
Midwest Region / Re: MBB: College Conference of Illinois and Wisconsin
« on: April 07, 2014, 05:25:55 pm »
Tonight's D1 championship game will pit the UProb (as in Probation) Huskies of Storrs, CT against the U of One-And-Done Wildcats of Lexington, KY.  ;)  :(
Neither state university will start any players from inside their respective state boundaries.  :o

5
Lacrosse, track, cross country, softball / Re: D 3 softball
« on: April 05, 2014, 03:36:48 pm »
Some brutal conditions. Saw part of a CCIW game yesterday between North Central and Illinois Wesleyan during which the actual temp was 38, but the wind chill took things down to 27! Burrrrrrrrrrr.
Fall weather much more baseball/softball like.  ;)

6
Midwest Region / Re: MBB: College Conference of Illinois and Wisconsin
« on: April 05, 2014, 02:38:13 pm »
Just finished reading an article in today's paper regarding the D1 tournament in general, and tonight's D1 semi-final games in particular. It served as a reminder of why I, and I suspect many other fans, am drawn to sports on the D3 level, especially basketball and football which I follow the most closely.

While I, and I suspect many other D3 fans, have a favorite D1 team or two, I find it pretty hard to become too invested in teams who frequently operate in the "one and done" mode, and whose top players are often gone before we really get a chance to become either very familiar with or very attached to.

Its a lot more fun, and a lot more interesting to have top players around for four years. Guys like Gamble, Kmiec, Peters, Haynes, Kelly, Davis, Ziemnik, and Sanford, among others, whose development and exploits can bring both joy and pain over the course of their 4 year college careers. While we likely aren't the biggest fans of most of the opposing players, and certainly don't/can't root for their respective teams, they draw our interest, keep us entertained, and reinforce the thought that sports on the D3 level, while primarily local as opposed to national in scope, is what the true college experience should be---a career as opposed to a pit stop.

Again, not to toot my own horn, but I suspect many other CCIW posters have at least fairly corresponding views. I sense many posters in other top conference rooms like the WIAC, and the NESCAC, might feel the same way.   :)

7
Midwest Region / Re: MBB: College Conference of Illinois and Wisconsin
« on: April 04, 2014, 01:00:27 am »
Cost to attend brings to mind a story I heard about a fairly recent former recruit whose dad is a wealthy suburban businessman used to being surrounded by costly possessions, and often associating price, above all else, with quality. Once the recruit and his parents had narrowed the initial 10-12 possibilities to a final 3, the monied father, under the theory of the most expensive school naturally and automatically being the best, ordained that his son attend the most costly of the 3 finalists.  :(

8
Midwest Region / Re: MBB: College Conference of Illinois and Wisconsin
« on: April 04, 2014, 12:40:05 am »
Gotta help those "poor" IWU students be able to afford the CCIW's most expensive institution!   

Elmhurst, I believe, is the most expensive based on the average tuition paid.  You quoted the sticker price, which some students pay but certainly not most.

I'll bet all the Pataka (MOP) in Macau that Illinois Wesleyan is not the second most expensive either.

WUH,

The cost figures I mentioned come from a June, 2013 survey of each of the schools, and include other costs besides just basic tuition itself.
Naturally, most students at every school don't pay the full "sticker" price.
I wonder about the source of your adjusted tuition costs.
Perhaps, in an effort to deflect some of the stigma associated with being the most costly CCIW institution, some of your Wesleyan friends have slipped you some misadjusted figures.  :)

With a more than $3,500.00 head start over the 2nd most expensive school, its hard to believe that unless IWU is giving away many more free academic dollars than all the other conference schools, that they would have much trouble holding on to the CCIW most expensive trophy.


9
Midwest Region / Re: MBB: College Conference of Illinois and Wisconsin
« on: April 03, 2014, 10:20:11 pm »

'Canterbury senior guard Grant Sinn to play for North Park U, a D3 school in Chicago'


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=82OCDvoxhhE

I think but am not positive Canterbury is a private high school in Fort Wayne, Indiana playing in Indiana's smallest division.  Don't quote me on that though.  I've seen him listed as both 6-1 and 6-2

SINNing at North Park U? Blasphemy!  :o

Who woulda thunk it?  ???

10
Midwest Region / Re: MBB: College Conference of Illinois and Wisconsin
« on: April 02, 2014, 11:09:23 pm »
Today -- April 2nd -- is "All In for Wesleyan" day -- trying to raise key dollars for student scholarship.  If you are an IWU alum, supporter, today is the day to give. 

It's easy -- to www.iwu.edu/challenge   

Matching gift by the Egbers family of US$250K -- so we can raise today US$500K or more for IWU.  We need everyone associated with IWU to be supportive.

Pardon the promo . . . pardon the pitch. 

All for a good cause.

IWU70

Yep. Gotta help those "poor" IWU students be able to afford the CCIW's most expensive institution!  :D 

CCIW Comparative Costs 2013-2014
                          Average $41,385

Illinois Wesleyan    $48,452
Augustana             $44,937
Carthage               $44,350
Elmhurst               $42,032
North Central         $41,940
Wheaton               $39,660
Millikin                  $38,382
North Park            $31,330

11
Midwest Region / Re: MBB: College Conference of Illinois and Wisconsin
« on: March 24, 2014, 11:39:55 pm »
Left Salem before the final game, but on Friday, I sure didn't see a whole lot of local fans at the game.
There was a lot of empty seats.
It has been talked about before, but it's time to move on. I've been to Salem 6 times now, the buzz for the locals is gone.
Yes, they do a great job, both running the event, and treating the teams like champs. The gym was half empty, and IWU travels well. It hurt that UWW had both teams playing in the final four, but not half the gym.
I don't have a place in mind, but I think it could us a new look.
Maybe the local fans thought that since the NCAA didn't charge to get into last years final game, they didn't want to pay this year, can't say I would blame them.

It seems as though the NCAA might want to start listening to the fans. Especially one who has been to Salem SIX times.  ;)

Also (taken from Pat Coleman's 3/23 article):

Of course, although the game was fantastic and played in front of 2,681 fans in a building where that looks like a decent number, it pales in comparison to the student-athlete experience and the crowd of more than 6,000 that saw Amherst beat Mary Hardin-Baylor last year. There were dozens of Division III coaches in Salem for the weekend and some are still talking about playing the D-III title game at the Division I championship site should be put into the permanent schedule.

If the NCAA doesn't want to consider fan's opinions, what about those of several NCAA D3 coaches?

12
Midwest Region / Re: MBB: College Conference of Illinois and Wisconsin
« on: March 24, 2014, 06:35:34 pm »
A trend that hopefully won't continue for CCIW teams making the Final Four.............

Last season North Central made the Final Four, only to drop their semi-final game to the eventual national champion by 8 points. This year, IWU likewise made the FF, only to also lose their semi-final game to the eventual national champ, also by the same 8 point deficit. Seems like the number 8 has something against the CCIW.  :)

13
Midwest Region / Re: MBB: College Conference of Illinois and Wisconsin
« on: March 24, 2014, 06:24:03 pm »
UW-Whitewater 71
Illinois Wesleyan 63

Definitely a tough game for the Titans last night in the national semifinal.  A few thoughts...

* IWU really had a hard time dealing with UWW star KJ Evans.  Not only was it difficult for the Titans to keep the 6-3 junior from getting into the lane off the dribble, but he hit a number of extremely difficult shots once he got into the lane.

* The Titans did not shoot the ball well.  IWU was a very uncharacteristic 5-23 from beyond the arc, and could not hit the big 3 needed in the final minutes to pull off the comeback - Pat Sodemann, Bryce Dolan, and Jordan Nelson all had great looks to cut the lead the single digits, but those did not fall.

* IWU, overall, was just never really in sync in the game.  The Titans made some uncharacteristically bad decisions throughout the course of the game, and never got in their normal flow.  The Warhawks certainly had a lot to do with that, but IWU just was not at its best last night.

* UW-Whitewater is a great team.  KJ Evans, who it seems should be on a Division I roster somewhere, just distorts the game with his athleticism and ability to score, and then the Warhawks have a number a great dangerous weapons around him.

Very tough loss, but a great season for the Titans


A great season for the Titans indeed!
Congrats to them for sure.
No need for any head hanging, or anything other than being very proud of a tremendous achievement.

14
Midwest Region / Re: MBB: College Conference of Illinois and Wisconsin
« on: March 24, 2014, 06:05:17 pm »
One last comment. The Mayberger charge call certainly did not change the outcome, but it was right in front of me and was a pathetically bad call. On the flip side, IWU fans can be very thankful that the ref called the Webster post player for an illegal screen with 3.6 seconds left to seal the win for IWU, a call that was very quesionable. You win some and lose some..

Lots of questions have arisen concerning the officials judgement in the UWW-IWU game.
I know veterancciwfan is a great IWU fan and supporter, and an insightful analyst. From his own observation, it appears there is a chance that IWU was perhaps a bit lucky not to have been the victim of a 1st round playoff exit given the fact that they were evidently the benefactor (bad calls usually even out?) of a "questionable" call in the closing seconds of the Webster game. So, maybe there was reason to be thankful for the advancement to the semi-final contest. And, having gotten there, again as IWU superfan Veterancciwfan attests, "5 of 23 3s is not going to win a big game against a good team. And going 18/27 at the line won't either"

15
Midwest Region / Re: MBB: College Conference of Illinois and Wisconsin
« on: March 24, 2014, 05:51:47 pm »
I'm curious do you guys think that every bad call made in the game was made against IWU and all of the calls made against the WARHAWKS were solid, on the money calls?  My experience is that bad calls generally go both ways but I didn't see the game so I don't really know.

My contention was never about the calls being good or bad, but rather just the overall manner or style of how the game was called. Any minor amount of contact was an automatic whistle. I thought it was called unusually tight. I know Victor Davis was called for 4 charging fouls alone and the team had another 2 or 3 called. I'm not saying that none of them were legit charging calls, but in most games I've seen, they were at most a no call. I don't think I can recall a game where some contact on the blocks resulted in so many charging calls. By letter of the law, they may all be charges. By practice, though, I'm not used to seeing a game called that way. As a result, what hurt, is that the style of officiating made us rely entirely too much on our outside shooting, where we clearly failed miserably. We became too much of a one dimensional team which isn't going to cut it against the likes of UWW.

IWU on Friday:  57 FG attempts, which was slightly above their season average.  23 3-pointers attempted which is exactly their season average.  So those #s don't much support that the Titans played any different sort of game than normal.

Yes, I understand on the season, we average quite a few 3 pt attempts. However, average implies there are games where we shoot less, like maybe a game when 3 pt shots aren't falling?

Whether any of us want to admit it, just about all of us would honestly have to say that experience shows that bad calls generally even out throughout the course of a game and/or season. Its the particular game and instance(s) within that game that are especially frustrating and that evoke a special ire.

If a game is being called tightly, shouldn't a good team make adjustments? If the possibility of a block/charge call seems to be resulting in a preponderance of charging calls, shouldn't the coach tell his team to pull up for a mid-range jumper, or to shot fake a defender to get him off balance, and then go around him rather than either just lowering a shoulder or using an arm bar and charging ahead on the dribble? It seems Wesleyan has the talent to do these things. The question is were adjustments made by the coaching staff? If so, was the adjusted strategy disregarded?

Lastly, when the 3 pointers weren't falling, perhaps another mode of attack would have produced a better result than to just routinely continue something that obviously wasn't working. For example, Division 1 transfer Jordan Nelson took six shots from the field during the game. ALL of the six were from beyond the arc, but not one was successful.  Perhaps putting the ball on the floor, getting into the defender, and likely drawing a foul and getting to the line would have been a wiser choice. Especially when you consider Nelson led the league in FT shooting, and was 3 of 4 in the UWW game. Could this have been something worth trying?

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 217