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 - Enginerd

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 8
1
Jester1390, the RHIT schedule now shows "@ Midwest Challenge - Illinois Wesleyan" for 28th-29th of November.
Does that one feature pre-determined 2nd day matchups, or do the day 1 winners play each other on day 2?
Am I remembering correctly that in a four-team "classic tournament" the day 2 matchups are pre-determined? Not sure there's an agreed-upon name for the other type.

I was told a few years ago when Rose bagan playing this event that the opponents for the following year's Midwest Classic would be whomever each team had not played in the previous year's edition. Therefore, RHIT should open this year vs. DePauw and the winner would play the winner of IWU/WashU.

2
Great Lakes Region / Re: HCAC
« on: April 09, 2020, 11:01:39 am »
I wonder about the accuracy of her listed overall FG% of 28%. Nearly all of her baskets in the highlight videos are layups. If she was primarily a three-point shooter, 28% would be more plausible.
Also you originally referred to her as a six-footer but they list her as 5'9".
We'll learn what's what in November, hopefully.

Agreed - all that matters is how these kids adapt to the academics and how they play when they get there. She does look really strong and athletic.

3
Central Region / Re: WBB: College Conference of Illinois and Wisconsin
« on: March 08, 2020, 11:27:51 pm »
I watched the last thirteen minutes or so of the game as it aired last night. Out of curiosity regarding all of this brouhaha, I watched the game in full today, and played back some of the controversial plays numerous times. My conclusions:

Having said that, it was pretty obvious that the officiating crew lost their minds in the games final 4-5 minutes.
 - The no-calls on contact against Munroe around the 4-minute mark

Nope. No contact there. Tolbert took a clean swipe at the ball at the 4:10 mark and just came up empty as Munroe moved away laterally.

and Brovelli in the last 15 seconds

Voskuil did bring up her arms with the ball at :09 and her left elbow glanced off of the side of Brovelli's head. It wasn't an elbow swing per se, nor did she extend her arms outward -- they strictly went up, not out -- but it was elbow-to-head contact that should've warranted a whistle. Here's the thing, though -- it should've never come to that point to begin with, because the refs made an error in Illinois Wesleyan's favor prior to the elbow-to-head contact. Namely, Brovelli should've been called for a dead-ball holding foul before Tolbert had even inbounded the ball. Brovelli had her left arm completely wrapped around Voskuil as Voskuil started moving; you can even see Brovelli's hand grasping the other side of Voskuil's body.

- The phantom call on Brovelli after the shot-clock issue

That didn't come in the game's final 4-5 minutes. It came with 1:27 to go in the third quarter. Nevertheless, it was a bad call. It was called by the sideline ref (the blonde), who was stationed behind Schoonveld as she drove around Brovelli, and was therefore screened by Schoonveld in terms of seeing any blocking contact by Brovelli. The replay showed that Brovelli didn't make contact at all with Schoonveld.

- The head-scratching foul call that should have been a held-ball under Hope's basket (even the announcers were trying to locate the contact initially) that sent Voskuil to the line.

I replayed this one (it's at :33) five or six times. The whistle (from the male ref on the baseline) came not when Sosa jumped up in the air, but a split second afterward when she got her left (outside) arm on Voskuil's right arm. As the PBP broadcaster said, it was a soft foul. He could've let it go, but there definitely appears to have been contact made by Sosa on Voskuil's right arm - and he was stationed five feet away, diagonally to Sosa and Voskuil, with a clear look inside at their arms. If Sosa had kept her arms inside of Voskuil's (i.e., on the ball), it definitely wouldn't have been called. As officiating goes, it could've gone either way between a call and a no-call, but a foul call was by no means an outrageous decision for that ref to make.

- That travelling call on Munroe was ridiculous

Nope. It was the right call. It's at 4:00 even. She lifted her entire trailing foot -- you can see the full sole of her sneaker -- while pointing her shoe toe (i.e., her pivot point) straight down, which means that it re-positioned just inches in front of where it had been when her foot was down. In that instance, the only way that you can maintain your shoe toe in the same space it had been occupying as the pivot point is if you're subtly moving the front of your foot backwards while the back of your foot lifts up -- and she didn't do that. Munroe was fully aware that she had traveled, as she clapped her hands while grimacing, disgusted with herself.

The traveling call against the Titans that I think the refs blew was the one against Shanks at 2:48. It looked pretty clear to me that Shanks had only taken one step forward when the ball left her hand downward into her initial dribble. The baseline ref (the non-blonde female) was looking right at her. I have no idea why she called it.

If the officials decided that the (extraordinarily) minimal amount of contact on the held-ball / foul call was important enough to the outcome of the game to blow the whistle and put someone on the line to score points, you also need to extend the same protection to offensive players attacking the basket (and drawing contact) on the other end of the floor. The amount of contact on a non-shooting play that drew a whistle on one end of the floor vs. the amount of contact on the other end on shooting plays that didn't get the same whistle, is glaring and, while it might not color how YOU see the officiating, it surely does for me. My opinion.

If you're referring to Tolbert's attempt to block from behind what turned out to be Brovelli's airballed layup attempt at :18, it wasn't a foul. There was no contact. You can see Tolbert's arm up in the air on the sideline camera shot, and when it cuts immediately to the baseline camera shot as Brovelli goes up for the layup attempt you can see that Tolbert's arm has dropped straight down, well behind Brovelli.

I don't know if the crew just decided they were going to "let them play" and that's just how things broke, or if classic psychology and 6,000 screaming fans got in their heads - either way circumstances came together to create opportunities late in the game for Hope, and like great teams do, they took advantage of them.

I think that a whole lot of this -- most of it, in fact -- is a case of people seeing what they want to see.

It's a shame that this is what everybody wants to talk about, because there were some pretty amazing plays down the stretch by both teams. The shot that Sosa makes for IWU's final basket, f'rinstance, at the 1:59 mark. I still can't figure out how she got that off in traffic, much less made it. And that inbounds play by Hope that broke the tie with 33 seconds left, in which Newman broke hard to the basket from up top, drawing the defense over to the right of the lane and clearing space for Schoonveld to double back from the free-throw line, take the inbound pass on the left-hand side of the lane, and make what turned out to be the game-winning layup ... that's every coach's dream, to draw up a play in a timeout in a tournament endgame scenario that not only turns out to be a perfect read on what the defense was going to do, but which your team executes perfectly. Listening to Brian Morehouse's postgame interview comments, it amazes me that Hope never practiced it; he and one of his assistants drew up the play on Friday night in anticipation that they might need it against IWU, and then he diagrammed it to the team in that final timeout and had to cross his fingers that they'd execute it properly. That's classic college basketball, right there.

But, I get it. People have their agendas, whether because of fandom or lingering ire or whatever. As I said, though, it's a shame that this is what everybody wants to talk about, because it really was a great game between a dominant favorite and a very plucky-but-skilled underdog that bossed most of the contest and very nearly came away with the upset.


Hope is pretty well-staffed, I doubt their AD was showing anyone where their locker room was that day - but she sure did walk out on the floor and spend 10 minutes with the officials...on the court. Talking. Laughing. It was obvious they knew one another pretty well. I'm sure there was nothing to it - but it looked weird. Weird enough to make mention of it with an "LoL".

I went back and watched that game this afternoon (the advantages of being retired) and honestly, the officiating wasn't too bad at all...until the 4th quarter. The whistles stopped in the last few minutes of the game, at least on one end - just like last night. Go look at the no-call at 2:10 in the 4th quarter and tell me the RHIT kid wasn't fouled. Wasn't knocked to the floor. Wasn't allowed room to land by the defender.

Use your pause button and you'll see that the foul called on RHIT at the basket at 1:14 was unbelievably bad. The kid's hand is literally 5 feet from the Hope player's arm, and the official that blew his whistle was out on the perimeter and couldn't possibly have seen what he called. There's also a HIGHLY questionable travel call that I'm not even including - along with a Hope player reaching clear-across a RHIT player's body to poke the ball away on RHIT's last possession - the kind of reaching and lazy defense that officials usually punish with a foul call - they certainly did it to Bowen from IWU last night.

My point is, I've now seen two games at DeVos. In both instances underdogs had Hope on the ropes (much more so last night) and came up empty-handed. There was questionable officiating in both games that benefited Hope, and I feel like the atmosphere intimidates officials. Call it home-court advantage or whatever you like, but it's really a thing in that building. In both cases, Hope made shots and plays when they needed to and prevailed, like great teams do.

4
Central Region / Re: WBB: College Conference of Illinois and Wisconsin
« on: March 08, 2020, 10:00:58 pm »
I watched the last thirteen minutes or so of the game as it aired last night. Out of curiosity regarding all of this brouhaha, I watched the game in full today, and played back some of the controversial plays numerous times. My conclusions:

Having said that, it was pretty obvious that the officiating crew lost their minds in the games final 4-5 minutes.
 - The no-calls on contact against Munroe around the 4-minute mark

Nope. No contact there. Tolbert took a clean swipe at the ball at the 4:10 mark and just came up empty as Munroe moved away laterally.

and Brovelli in the last 15 seconds

Voskuil did bring up her arms with the ball at :09 and her left elbow glanced off of the side of Brovelli's head. It wasn't an elbow swing per se, nor did she extend her arms outward -- they strictly went up, not out -- but it was elbow-to-head contact that should've warranted a whistle. Here's the thing, though -- it should've never come to that point to begin with, because the refs made an error in Illinois Wesleyan's favor prior to the elbow-to-head contact. Namely, Brovelli should've been called for a dead-ball holding foul before Tolbert had even inbounded the ball. Brovelli had her left arm completely wrapped around Voskuil as Voskuil started moving; you can even see Brovelli's hand grasping the other side of Voskuil's body.

- The phantom call on Brovelli after the shot-clock issue

That didn't come in the game's final 4-5 minutes. It came with 1:27 to go in the third quarter. Nevertheless, it was a bad call. It was called by the sideline ref (the blonde), who was stationed behind Schoonveld as she drove around Brovelli, and was therefore screened by Schoonveld in terms of seeing any blocking contact by Brovelli. The replay showed that Brovelli didn't make contact at all with Schoonveld.

- The head-scratching foul call that should have been a held-ball under Hope's basket (even the announcers were trying to locate the contact initially) that sent Voskuil to the line.

I replayed this one (it's at :33) five or six times. The whistle (from the male ref on the baseline) came not when Sosa jumped up in the air, but a split second afterward when she got her left (outside) arm on Voskuil's right arm. As the PBP broadcaster said, it was a soft foul. He could've let it go, but there definitely appears to have been contact made by Sosa on Voskuil's right arm - and he was stationed five feet away, diagonally to Sosa and Voskuil, with a clear look inside at their arms. If Sosa had kept her arms inside of Voskuil's (i.e., on the ball), it definitely wouldn't have been called. As officiating goes, it could've gone either way between a call and a no-call, but a foul call was by no means an outrageous decision for that ref to make.

- That travelling call on Munroe was ridiculous

Nope. It was the right call. It's at 4:00 even. She lifted her entire trailing foot -- you can see the full sole of her sneaker -- while pointing her shoe toe (i.e., her pivot point) straight down, which means that it re-positioned just inches in front of where it had been when her foot was down. In that instance, the only way that you can maintain your shoe toe in the same space it had been occupying as the pivot point is if you're subtly moving the front of your foot backwards while the back of your foot lifts up -- and she didn't do that. Munroe was fully aware that she had traveled, as she clapped her hands while grimacing, disgusted with herself.

The traveling call against the Titans that I think the refs blew was the one against Shanks at 2:48. It looked pretty clear to me that Shanks had only taken one step forward when the ball left her hand downward into her initial dribble. The baseline ref (the non-blonde female) was looking right at her. I have no idea why she called it.

If the officials decided that the (extraordinarily) minimal amount of contact on the held-ball / foul call was important enough to the outcome of the game to blow the whistle and put someone on the line to score points, you also need to extend the same protection to offensive players attacking the basket (and drawing contact) on the other end of the floor. The amount of contact on a non-shooting play that drew a whistle on one end of the floor vs. the amount of contact on the other end on shooting plays that didn't get the same whistle, is glaring and, while it might not color how YOU see the officiating, it surely does for me. My opinion.

If you're referring to Tolbert's attempt to block from behind what turned out to be Brovelli's airballed layup attempt at :18, it wasn't a foul. There was no contact. You can see Tolbert's arm up in the air on the sideline camera shot, and when it cuts immediately to the baseline camera shot as Brovelli goes up for the layup attempt you can see that Tolbert's arm has dropped straight down, well behind Brovelli.

I don't know if the crew just decided they were going to "let them play" and that's just how things broke, or if classic psychology and 6,000 screaming fans got in their heads - either way circumstances came together to create opportunities late in the game for Hope, and like great teams do, they took advantage of them.

I think that a whole lot of this -- most of it, in fact -- is a case of people seeing what they want to see.

It's a shame that this is what everybody wants to talk about, because there were some pretty amazing plays down the stretch by both teams. The shot that Sosa makes for IWU's final basket, f'rinstance, at the 1:59 mark. I still can't figure out how she got that off in traffic, much less made it. And that inbounds play by Hope that broke the tie with 33 seconds left, in which Newman broke hard to the basket from up top, drawing the defense over to the right of the lane and clearing space for Schoonveld to double back from the free-throw line, take the inbound pass on the left-hand side of the lane, and make what turned out to be the game-winning layup ... that's every coach's dream, to draw up a play in a timeout in a tournament endgame scenario that not only turns out to be a perfect read on what the defense was going to do, but which your team executes perfectly. Listening to Brian Morehouse's postgame interview comments, it amazes me that Hope never practiced it; he and one of his assistants drew up the play on Friday night in anticipation that they might need it against IWU, and then he diagrammed it to the team in that final timeout and had to cross his fingers that they'd execute it properly. That's classic college basketball, right there.

But, I get it. People have their agendas, whether because of fandom or lingering ire or whatever. As I said, though, it's a shame that this is what everybody wants to talk about, because it really was a great game between a dominant favorite and a very plucky-but-skilled underdog that bossed most of the contest and very nearly came away with the upset.


OK - so I got my counter-times and IWU players mixed-up a couple times here. I don't think you can refute any of the following:

 - The horrible travel-call I was referring to WAS the call on Shanks at 2;48. Absolutely horrible call to make at that point in the game, with both teams playing their guts out. An obvious travel is pretty easy to see/call, and this one is very perplexing. The official HAD to have been anticipating blowing his whistle - there's just no other explanation. The non-blonde female official  is literally right on top of it and she wasn't going to call anything. If you watch the guy (the male official) he is actually walking AWAY from the ball and has his head craned to the left before Shanks ever puts the ball on the floor. He was walking the other way - handing her off to the baseline official.

 - Making the above call look even more incompetent, two FAR worse calls, or I suppose I should say no-calls, highlight the disparity between how the teams were treated by the officials at times last night, unintended or not. While you've got YouTube up in your browser, roll it back to the unthinkable no-call at the 25-second mark of the 3rd quarter - where the Hope player caught the ball around the foul line, then shuffled her feet twice and took a giant step and a half - without dribbling the ball? It was beyond incompetent that none of the three officials saw it. She just passed the ball to Voskuil, who spun in the lane, scored, and drew the foul and a three-point play. Barely more than a minute of game-clock later, at 9:30 in the 4th quarter. you'll see Thomas attack down the right lane-line and score. Problem is, literally BOTH her feet leave the ground as she hops briefly in the air to put the ball on the floor and head to the basket. It's as blatant a travel as you'll ever see, except the three people with the whistles didn't.

When you won 't call either of those two BLATANT travels, irrefutably costing IWU five points, then decide Shanks DID travel at 2:48 when she clearly didn't, and Hope immediately knocks down a momentum-grabbing 3-pointer, I think it's ok to question the officials' competence - and I don't understand why you or anyone else wouldn't? Being lousy officials not up to the task and susceptible of being influenced by the crowd doesn't mean they were TRYING to help Hope - it just means they shouldn't be officiating NCAA Tournament games.

...and those aren't even the WORST examples of how IWU was treated by the officials last night.

 - Immediately after the 2nd Thomas travel that wasn't called, Sosa back-cut her defender and Shanks passed the ball to her in full-stride, and Voskuil came across the lane AND FOULED HER. She blocked the shot clean but got her with the body pretty darn good - spun her around. You can see Sosa's incredulous reaction. She couldn't believe a foul was not called. This no-call makes the foul-call on the 50/50 / held-ball under Hope's basket even more suspect. Why call the 50/50 "soft" foul when you're letting Hope get away with murder on the Sosa shot in the lane? Pretty stark examples of one call that could have gone either way and another that was probably the most obvious foul of the whole game - both going against IWU.

Later on, Bowen from IWU was whistled for her fifth foul at 4:12 for reaching on Voskuil's up-and-under move. Problem is, Bowen didn't foul her, if you slow it down and play around with the pause button, you can see it plain as day. Her hand was ON TOP OF the ball, and she never even touched Voskuil.

Now - the IWU kid reached, and you can often expect to have a foul called when you reach-in like that, even if there's no contact -  but if you're going to let an obvious, blatant foul go, like the one on Sosa at 9:15, you can't expect a casual observer not to raise an eyebrow on Bowen's fifth foul, just because she reached. You cannot pretend to have some nuance in your officiating on one end and not the other.

BTW - I stand corrected on IWU's last shot, there's no way to tell if there was any contact, judging by Brovelli's lack of reaction Id say there probably was no foul - but Tolbert REACHED and her hand in there forced Brovelli to change her shot, just like Bowen did earlier. I wonder if the shot had been on the other end of the floor and the roles reversed, if we'd have seen the same no-call.

The others above are but a handful of examples of pretty inconsistent, incompetent officiating. It's there for you to see with your own eyes.

5
Central Region / Re: WBB: College Conference of Illinois and Wisconsin
« on: March 08, 2020, 06:02:19 pm »

Generally, though, nothing good happens when you watch the home team's AD walk over to the officials on the sideline where they stand during warm-ups, and begin laughing and back-slapping with them like they were at a reunion. LoL.


Yes I see the LoL at the end of this quote, but seriously??  The AD of any host school (if they are any good) is going to chat with the officials and make sure they feel comfortable. Thatís their job, after all.

If youíre going to suggest some kind of conspiracy or the like (which you are) then tighten your tinfoil hat and go for it. Iíll bet they were discussing what they might do just to piss off a poster on d3hoops.

Please. There isn't a single college or university in America that includes a merriment session for the officials with the host Athletic Director prior to tip-off. You're not suggesting you've seen multiple instances of that at Hope or anywhere else, are you? Does Hope not have a game management staff that sees to visitors' needs?

Nevertheless, in over 50 years of watching college basketball, it remains the lone instance where I can remember the AD interacting with the officials prior to the game. What was she asking? I even asked my nephew's son, who was a Hope student at the time, "who is that lady down on the floor having such a grand time with the officials?" So yeah, when I see something THAT extraordinary, and then witness some similarly extraordinary lapses in officiating....I mean...if the tin-foil hat fits...

I specifically mentioned that I could have been wrong. Three years is a pretty good wait to go back and take a look from a different perspective. It would be interesting, because I certainly remember some things that really stood out in the 2nd half. Sometimes things are not as you remember them. Watching the officiating last night really took me back a few years to the last game I saw in DeVos.

It couldn't possibly have been consciously intentional, but Hope had some help last night, just as I remember them getting in 2016, and like that game 3+ years ago, they took advantage and they made plays and shots when they needed them, and for that they alone are responsible. The officials can't throw the ball in the basket for anyone, after all.

I'm a fan for the remainder of the season. It's about time they win another one. It's been way too long with the talent they've had over the years. Will be like Dean Smith finally getting one in 1982 or his second one in 1993. I really hope they do it.

6
Central Region / Re: WBB: College Conference of Illinois and Wisconsin
« on: March 08, 2020, 02:51:22 pm »
The NCAA always makes it a point to ensure that officials that work tournament games come from conferences other than the ones to which the teams that are playing belong.

Rose-Hulman had at least one CCIW official when they played Wheaton at WashU in 2017 - or at least he was a CCIW official the following year. Either that or he was a fill-in for a single game the following year.

7
Central Region / Re: WBB: College Conference of Illinois and Wisconsin
« on: March 08, 2020, 02:49:12 pm »
Home court advantage is real, statistics prove it and folks like Massey actually show the data.  Reasons may include travel fatigue by the visitors, familiarity with the gym and the rims, and the atmosphere that may energize the home team, intimidate the visitors and yes even influence refs.  This is understood and it's why people strive for home court.

I think the discussion goes off track when there's an allegation of "homer" treatment; it implies calculated and deliberate favoritism by the refs.   There's no indication of that.  Glancing at box scores, these refs have not officiated any other Hope games this year.

I'll go back and look at the film again sometime, because it is still available on YouTube, but I recall thinking RHIT got "homered" in the classic sense when they lost to Hope down there in 2017-18. Would be interesting to go back 3 years later, with some perspective, and take another look.

Generally, though, nothing good happens when you watch the home team's AD walk over to the officials on the sideline where they stand during warm-ups, and begin laughing and back-slapping with them like they were at a reunion. LoL.

My thoughts when I used the phrase last night were that Hope's ridiculous home-court advantage, in all it's manifestations, was the difference, and not any willful intent on the part of the officials.

That said, I'd love to see Hope knock off one of the NESCAC teams for the title this year.

8
Central Region / Re: WBB: College Conference of Illinois and Wisconsin
« on: March 08, 2020, 10:51:51 am »
I hear a lot of complaining about the refs from IWU fans. As a Hope fan I felt the same way, only going the other way. So that means that in reality the Officials were likely quite fair and called the game evenly.

You might have felt that way for the first 35 minutes of the game. but I doubt you did over the last 4-5.

I think IWU fans have every right to be upset over 4th quarter officiating because it left a lot to be desired - but that doesn't cheapen Hope's gritty win. Hope caught a few breaks, but still had to take advantage of them. Happens all the time and not every team is able to do so when the opportunity presents itself.

It is true that, regardless of what the officials did or did not do, they didn't cause IWU to miss two huge free throws late, nor did they cause Hope to make HUGE back-to-back 3-pointers exactly when they needed them, to say nothing of the OB play, which was brilliantly executed. The officials did not win the game for Hope. It took some serious gumption to make those two threes when their team needed them, and great teams always find a way to win, period. Lesser teams/players would not have won that game last night.

Having said that, it was pretty obvious that the officiating crew lost their minds in the games final 4-5 minutes.
 - The no-calls on contact against Munroe around the 4-minute mark and Brovelli in the last 15 seconds
 - The phantom call on Brovelli after the shot-clock issue
 - The head-scratching foul call that should have been a held-ball under Hope's basket (even the announcers were trying to locate the contact initially) that sent Voskuil to the line.
 - That travelling call on Munroe was ridiculous

If the officials decided that the (extraordinarily) minimal amount of contact on the held-ball / foul call was important enough to the outcome of the game to blow the whistle and put someone on the line to score points, you also need to extend the same protection to offensive players attacking the basket (and drawing contact) on the other end of the floor. The amount of contact on a non-shooting play that drew a whistle on one end of the floor vs. the amount of contact on the other end on shooting plays that didn't get the same whistle, is glaring and, while it might not color how YOU see the officiating, it surely does for me. My opinion.

I don't know if the crew just decided they were going to "let them play" and that's just how things broke, or if classic psychology and 6,000 screaming fans got in their heads - either way circumstances came together to create opportunities late in the game for Hope, and like great teams do, they took advantage of them.

9
Central Region / Re: WBB: College Conference of Illinois and Wisconsin
« on: March 08, 2020, 12:26:39 am »
Flying Dutch, very dubious calls at key moments turned the game.  The call on Brovelli, not a foul, the travelling call on Shanks in the corner, not a travel, she made the basket, and the elbow to Brovelli's face with 15 seconds to go.  Also the foul calls on Sosa and Shanks, both of which were clearly a held ball.  We'll I don't normally "whine" about the zebras either, but you have to admit these were bad calls at a more crucial time than whatever missed calls you are talking about in the first half.  IWU outplayed your team for all but those 3-4 key minutes, when these calls were made. Your floor has a "homer" reputation, I guess for good reason.  Great crowd, great atmosphere always, very similar to The Shirk.   Two great programs fighting it out.   Good luck to your team the rest of the way, they did play great D and had a good comeback.  But, I think IWU has reason to feel that this ending was not exactly fully chipper.  That's basketball . . . but, a very tough loss for IWU and IWU fans to swallow.  Sorry.

Good luck to your team the rest of the way.  You surely dodged a bullet tonight.

'70

I am not an IWU fan, and only watched the game out of boredom tonight, so I'm likely the least motivated observer on this thread. That said, Hope benefited from some uneven 2nd-half officiating.

IWU were responsible for a great deal of what happened over the last four minutes, like the two missed free throws, but there was some suspect officiating in the 2nd half. I watched most of the game, and I only recall the one travelling call on Shanks, yet saw far worse examples throughout the game from both teams, without a call. I do not think Shanks even came close to travelling - and to make that call, at that point in the game, after not having made it a priority the entire game to that point, is just inexplicable - like the phantom call on Brovelli after Hope's coach chewed on the officials' ears over three lost seconds on the shot-clock. To me, THAT is the call that says it all. The officials weren't cheating or consciously trying to help Hope, but the crowd and the atmosphere really got into their heads - they weren't up to it and didn't do a great job. As another poster pointed out, it's human nature when there are 6,000 screaming people in the same building.

Did it cost IWU the game? Who knows? Would IWU have gotten anything out of that possession had Shanks not been called for travelling? Would Munroe have made her free throws if the (very) obvious foul had been called on Voskuil when she blocked her shot and knocked her to the ground under the basket around the 4-5-minute mark? Would Brovelli have made both free throws with the game on the line and 15 seconds left on the clock (after she was clearly fouled at the basket-but no call)? Who knows?

Would have been a monumental upset, too. IWU is an elite program - but a win tonight vs. such an obscenely talented team in their own building would have been one for the ages. Hope is an above-average D-II team playing D-III basketball. I'd bet they could win 15-18 games per year, without too much trouble, as a member of the GLAC - much as Thomas More was immediately a Top-20 NAIA team this year with essentially the same roster that won the D-III title last year.

 I haven't ever bothered to really watch any of the East Coast / NESCAC teams - but I will this year because I want to see how Hope's talent and length stacks up against them, because that's where this is headed.

10
Central Region / Re: WBB: College Conference of Illinois and Wisconsin
« on: March 07, 2020, 09:22:53 pm »
I knew IWU was in trouble when the Hope coach spent 5 minutes drilling the officials over a couple seconds on the shot clock (that they didn't deserve) and didn't get his way - but as soon as the ball was in-bounded and the Hope player started to dribble across the lane, the official whistled Brovelli - just for running alongside her...

11
Central Region / Re: WBB: College Conference of Illinois and Wisconsin
« on: March 07, 2020, 08:37:26 pm »
IWU getting homered like RHIT did up there a few years ago. Several phantom calls against IWU - a blatant no-call at the basket with Munroe getting fouled. Brovelli looks like she got fouled with 15 seconds left. Hope would have gotten that call.
I had forgotten how badly RHIT got screwed up there in 2017-18.

12
Central Region / Re: WBB: College Conference of Illinois and Wisconsin
« on: March 07, 2020, 04:33:05 pm »
Hope is ridiculously talented - even without one of their best players whom I believe they lost for the remainder of the season back in January. IWU is very talented as well and I honestly feel like they are a threat to win 2-3 games in the tournament every year.

Hope ought to be embarrassed that they can put that much talent on an NCAA Division III floor. I'll bet every kid on their bench and virtually all their JV players would be starters on most good D-III teams - and their kids that actually play would be contributors for any D-II program (and some of them, D-I's) in the Midwest. Having a Hall of Fame coach doesn't hurt, either.

Having said that, though, you still have to play 40 (or more) minutes, and if anyone in this quadrant has any hope (no pun intended) of taking them out, you could do a lot worse than picking the Titans tonight.

13
Great Lakes Region / Re: HCAC
« on: March 02, 2020, 04:05:12 pm »
Congrats to Transy! They again have a very do-able draw and should be pretty thrilled with it. They might still be playing in two weeks.

Having said that - WOW - Transy getting to host is a perfect example of what the two primary driving factors behind how the D3 field is chosen must be - money and convenience - because it is otherwise impossible to defend having a team with an NCAA # barely above .500 and ZERO wins vs. RRO's (if Hanover drops out of the final GL rankings) host an NCAA Tournament pod.

Again, I am happy for Transy, I'm a fan for the next week or longer, but  Good Lord...


14
Great Lakes Region / Re: HCAC
« on: March 01, 2020, 03:57:09 pm »
I think Transy will destroy the field at the HCAC Tournament - so any discussion about whether they deserve an at-large bid is moot. They'll likely get a winnable 1st round game, too. Will be interesting to see where they get sent. My way-too-early prognostication is Oglethorpe - and I wouldn't be surprised if they managed another Sweet 16 appearance - depending on the match-ups with the other two teams in that pod.

Told you so.

 Just remains to be seen where they get sent. I'll bet they go to either DePauw/Baldwin Wallace (whichever winds up #2 in the region) or Oglethorpe. They should get a manageable #2 vs. #3 game if they are sent South - Potential match-ups at Oglethorpe might be Randolph-Macon, Emory, Emory and Henry, William Peace, or even Piedmont if they beat Berea today - Berea might show up at the same pod, but I think the NCAA tries to avoid first-round match-ups of teams that played each other during the regular season. Likely opponents if they stay in the Great Lakes could be IL. Wesleyan, Wheaton, Trine, or one of the OAC schools. Surely they wouldn't be sent to Texas.

There might be too many southeastern/eastern teams for Transy to go to Oglethorpe - in which case they'd almost certainly have to be sent to DePauw/Baldwin Wallace, Hope, or Chicago.

They ought to leap-frog Trine in the final regional standings since they are a conference champion and Trine is not - which usually means a better #2-#3 match-up somewhere. RHIT's tournament title in 2018 meant a winnable pod with Wisc.-Whitewater and Gustavus Adolphus instead of the "pod of death" at IL. Wesleyan with DePauw, the Titans, and a pretty damn good Marietta team, which is where Trine was sent. The committee clearly placed some value on being a conference champion and this might be to Transy's benefit - despite their poor SOS and lack of any meaningful games vs. RRO's.

They'd have a far more manageable draw if they were to be sent to Atlanta - anywhere in the Great Lakes is almost certainly going to be that "pod of death".

15
Great Lakes Region / Re: HCAC
« on: February 27, 2020, 07:40:26 am »
Transy fell to 5th in the regional rankings and Hanover makes an appearance at 9th.

Transy needs to win the HCAC Tournament.  If they don't, they need to hope that Baldwin Wallace wins the OAC and Ohio Northern and John Carroll both lose early in the OAC Tournament (which IS typically a bloodbath). Having no games vs. RRO's would be a killer with three losses and an anemic NCAA #, with two OAC schools with multiple games vs. RRO's and big NCAA #'s sitting right behind them in the regional rankings.

Here's the problem. Transy is MORE than good enough to be an NCAA Tournament team this year, just like RHIT last year and in 2016. RHIT wanted to ensure it wouldn't happen again, so they went out and added Chicago, became the 4th permanent member of the Midwest Classic, and scheduled anyone that would play them, just to try to overcome the perception of the HCAC being a weak conference and the precipitous drop in the NCAA # after conference play - and THEY STILL got left home last season. I'll guarantee you that RHIT was better than Denison in 2016, better than Baldwin-Wallace last year, and Transy is better than anyone in the OAC THIS year, but, as HCAC schools, they need to play virtually a suicidal non-conference schedule just to get the respect than an OAC school does just by showing up for their conference games.
Let's assume Transy is pool C... that means they lose in the tournament, ideally in the championship to Hanover. Hanover is now a ranked opponent and they'd be 1-2 which is still better than 0-0.

Got this from today's release on the main D3Hoops site - seems to imply that only those teams ranked on the 19th are considered to be RRO's for the purpose of the 4th and final regional ranking? If I'm reading this correctly Transy is 0-0 vs. RRO's, and that ain't changing.

"The third public NCAA Division III regional rankings were released on Feb. 26. They are the last of three sets which we will see before the selections are made and announced on Monday, March 2. There is also one final set of regional rankings, which is released after the tournament bracket is revealed. This ranking uses the Feb. 19 regional rankings to determine which teams qualify as "results vs. regionally ranked opponents."
That line should be in a separate paragraph. "This ranking uses the Feb 19..." is referring to the latest rankings using the ranked teams from the Feb 19th rankings. Here's the same paragraph from the previous rankings
Quote
The second public NCAA Division III regional rankings were released on Feb. 19. They are the middle of three sets which we will see before the selections are made and announced on Monday, March 2. There is also one final set of regional rankings, which is released after the tournament bracket is revealed. This ranking uses the Feb. 12 regional rankings to determine which teams qualify as "results vs. regionally ranked opponents."



No - it shouldn't. It was all part of the quote and not my opinion or words.

Guys, much as I'd like to see it happen (because they are really good at home-I think they could have beaten Thomas More at home last year) there is very little chance Transy could possibly host - unless the schools that finish ahead of them haven't put in bids or their men's programs DO put in bids and this year belongs to the men's side for hosting precedence. They aren't leap-frogging DePauw or Hope, or now BW, or likely anyone else at this point, unless Trine loses in a semi-final. Additionally, the NCAA #'s of Ohio Northern and John Carroll will get better playing games in the OAC Tournament. Other than Trine, the only place for them to go in the rankings is down. The absolute best they could do is 4th (5th if Trine upsets Hope), because whomever wins the OAC (unless it's a real dark-horse) will pass Transy. There's no chance they'll finish ahead of Hope, regardless of what happens in the MIAC, and as long as DePauw makes the NCAC finals, the same holds. If Transy wins the HCAC, they will finish behind DePauw, Hope, and whomever wins the OAC, and if Transy finishes 4th or 5th in their region with ZERO games vs. RRO's, there will be some extraordinarily upset folks, and they'll have a legitimate argument, if they are chosen to host.

If they don't win the HCAC, they would be in serious jeopardy of not getting in at all without any games vs. RRO's, which, to my knowledge, have not been factors thus far in the first three rankings, but will be an important criteria for the final one.

I'm telling you, Transy is as good as anyone in the Great Lakes region except Hope - but as I've said, any HCAC team that wants to be treated like other, more prominent programs at the end of the year, really need to go out and schedule some of the better OAC and UAA teams, and not rely on the old venus fly-trap strategy of only getting quality opponents when they'll come play in one of your events (if you think I'm picking on Transy, I'm not, the only quality non-conference team I remember Bluffton playing during their 2015-18 run was when St. Thomas came and played in their event) or accidentally bump into a quality team at someone else's event.

I'll bet they get sent to Ogelthorpe - either as a conference champion in the #2 slot or as an at-large in the #3 spot. It really might make very little difference HOW they get in. If it's Oglethorpe, they REALLY match-up well with them and could very well advance out of the first weekend - they just need to GET to the first weekend.

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 8