MBB: Centennial Conference

[r.w. mcnickels]

RS: Apparently during 1993-99 the CC got that kind of respect. Admittedly there was a sea change since then perhaps coincidentally associated temporally with the rise & ever increasing prominence of this valued website & their analytical team prone to discounting & dissing even conference champs with 22-23 wins & giving them no consideration for at large berths. Below is a list of what things were like before that.

1999: F&M & JHU
1998: JHU & Muhl
1996: F&M & G-berg
1995: F&M & Muhl
1994: F&M & JHU
1993: F&M & JHU (1st year of CC)

To borrow from "All in the Family's"  theme -- "Those were the Days" which I wonder if can ever be seen again.

The NCAA cut down on the number of teams from 64 to 48 at the end of the decade, and things were bound to be different.  It wasn't about respect.

There's no doubt F&M would have made the NCAA tournament in 2002 and 2003 (with identical records of 22-5 each year) had the old system been in place.  And if my memory is correct, Capital lost out to the "new" system with a record of 23-5 in 2002.  Lots of good teams got shafted by the old system, not just teams in the Centennial.

At least this year, with the expanded field, we don't have a bunch of national contenders sitting at home this weekend.

[D.B. Cooper]

This recent discussion can give all the new CC posters a hint of the feelings toward this conference & why it might be helpful to go out with this Ursinus senior class & win some games.
I find it interesting that the Moderator looked up my response to a simple question regarding the last CC team besides F&M to win an NCAA game & made it look like I was trying to make some point of his choosing.
This X-Files type of blame that is placed on the CC re: a 1998 snub of Goucher for FDU-Madison frequently surfaces. Think of it, the CC conference cuts an unholy deal with the Devils to keep out a CAC team & replace them with an MAC team that doesn't generally even play our conference teams. It certainly was a clear poor choice of an NCAA participant, but how & why would the CC hatch such a conspiracy & why would the other schools go along with it? Was it to help out the MAC over the CAC? Is that what is to believed? Note that no CC team got in instead.
It is hard to quantify the infuenence this site has & I believe it is generally a very positive force toward getting better teams recognized. But in most years it seems the NCAA Regional rankings have often seemed to lower the CC team seedings late in the season, with no clear underlying catalyst,  making it difficult to get an NCAA bid without winning one. This probably is multifactorial, the respected polls & opinions on this site may possibly infuence some coaches on the committee, but that fact it seems to happen recurrently makes one wonder why.

[Pat Coleman]

I find it interesting that the Moderator looked up my response to a simple question regarding the last CC team besides F&M to win an NCAA game & made it look like I was trying to make some point of his choosing.

It may have been a simple question, but was hardly a simple response. Your veiled  allegations, which have subsquently been clearly debunked by one of your own fellow CC posters, could not be left unchallenged.

This X-Files type of blame that is placed on the CC re: a 1998 snub of Goucher for FDU-Madison frequently surfaces. Think of it, the CC conference cuts an unholy deal with the Devils to feep out a CAC team & replace them with an MAC team that doesn't generally even play our conference teams. It certainly was a clear poor choice of an NCAA participant, but how & why would the CC hatch such a conspiracy & why would the other schools go along with it? Was it to help out the MAC over the CAC? Is that what is to believed? Note that no CC team got in instead.

Interesting. I didn't claim that 1998 was the result of a Centennial presence on the committee, yet you jumped to that conclusion. Perhaps there's a chip on someone's shoulder? I believe there was a MAC rep on that committee that was far more directly affected by that playoff selection.

[D.B. Cooper]

Pat I apologize if I misunderstood your point about the 1998 NCAA selection process. The comment had been made in the past that the CC representative was the cause of improperly placing FDU-Madision in the '98 field was made by a journalist on your website & I wrongly presumed you agreed with him. I never mentioned anything about 1998's selection process until it was brought up.

[bearsfan1]

Same outcome as before: one and done

[brian_walsh]

I guess my bracket (picking UC to the Final Four) is busted.  Oh well, optimistic alumni I guess.  Just wanted to say thank you to the five seniors for a great four years.  They were able to take Ursinus to the next level.  I missed playing with those guys by one year but know them and they are all great guys.  Hopefully McGarvey will get some serious consideration for the Jostens award and Shattuck, Fabian (who my father who was at the game sad was an animal tonight) Furey and the rest of the team will be able to get a win next year in the NCAAs.

[Reserved Seat]

Unfortunately, the Centennial Conference representative crashed and burned.  What happened?  3-point shooting?

[patcummings]

Nope...3 pt shooting not an issue.

Farmingdale State just worked harder in the 2nd half.  40-32 Ursinus at the break...Farmingdale outscored Ursinus 61-42 in the 2nd half.  Farmingdale is just a more physical presence, bottom line.  Given how VaWes has played lately (very close games), they could have a tough one Saturday.

This much is clear...most Centennial non-conference games are not played against scrappy teams like Farmingdale.  Ursinus's schedule of NYU, Immaculata, Leb Val, Drew, Whitman, and York in no way prepared them for tonight.  NYCCT from last year was somewhat similar in style, but Farmingdale was clearly the stronger team once they got their playoff legs under them. 

More later...

[fritzdis]

This much is clear...most Centennial non-conference games are not played against scrappy teams like Farmingdale.  Ursinus's schedule of NYU, Immaculata, Leb Val, Drew, Whitman, and York in no way prepared them for tonight.  NYCCT from last year was somewhat similar in style, but Farmingdale was clearly the stronger team once they got their playoff legs under them. 

More later...

Ursinus also played Trinity, CT.  Their non-conference schedule was not just filled with patsies (not that your statement necessarily implies that), although they did lose to the 3 really good teams they played (NYU, York, Trinity).

[Pat Coleman]

Yeah, I think Pat is referring to style as much as quality.

[cc_fan]

I enjoyed watching Ursinus all year and even though they were unable to beat Farmindale State, it was nice to see them win the centennial.  Ursinus will return three starters next season but it will be extremely hard to fill McGarvey's shoes at point guard.

[swish]

They not only have to find a point guard but a two as well. I don't think they have any backcourt men coming back who saw any significant playing time.

[cc_fan]

Any predictions on who will be the team to beat next year?  Maybe Hopkins?

[Leo]

Great expectation can lead to success and happiness, as well as disappointment and sadness. UC was successful in meeting the expectation to repeat as CC champs. However, the expectation to go deep into the NCAA tournament ended with great disapointment and sadness. My 1 1/2 hr drive home seemed like 3 hrs. I am proud of Coach Small and the players in what they accomplished this season. Time will heal this hurt, and time will give alumni and CC fans to discuss/dissect this game, the team and the status of the CC teams and Centennial Conference in relationship to other Conferences. Kudos to the UC fans who were there. They were loud and supportive. It was a great experience.

UC played well in the 1st half. They got the ball inside to use their height advantage, good shooting and played good perimeter defense to affect Farmingdale's 3 pt shooting. UC had an edge in fast breaks pts (6 vs 0), 2nd chance pts (10 vs 4), and free throws (10-16 vs 4-7). Hence, they had an 8 pt lead at half.

The first 5 mins of the 2nd half dictated 2nd half play, and evenutally the outcome of the game. UC could not get the ball inside, poor outside shooting and turnovers. Farmingdale made adjustments by beginning to pound the boards, and putting a quicker and bigger player on McGarvey. Farmingdale had an edge on pts from turnovers (13 vs 2), and 2nd chance pts (12 vs 2). Pounding the boards affected UC's perimeter defense allowing Farmingdale to live up to their reputation on shooting 3's. McGarvey is a super player, and I love his play. However, he needed to be super + super, which is too much to put on any player in the game. UC players needed to help him.

Farmingdale was undersized compared to UC, but demonstrated better quickness and athletic ability. Some may say that these were the same reasons that contributed to UC's loss in the 1st round last year too. I disagree because it all comes down to execution and making adjustments. It is not fair to knock or disrespect UC, CC teams and Centennial Conference because their non-league games does not give them the experience/exposure to play with teams who have better quickness and/or athletic ability. Style of play is great for discusion and debating purposes among sports fan. Imposing a team's style of play on another through better execution and adjustments during the game is what makes for great sporting events. However, some may say that the quality of CC teams in the Conference is contributing to the lack of Centennial Conference success and respect at NCAA tournament time. Two years does not make a trend.

I am not a Centennial Conference historian or alum, but I have found the past 3 years to be fun and enjoyable in following UC. I thank Coach Small and the players for that ride  .  

[Reserved Seat]

Thanks for the details.
Hopefully all the Centennial teams can have a good recruiting season, but I would say Hopkins is the early favorite based on what players they have returning.