Author Topic: 2018 NCAA Tournament  (Read 36691 times)

Online Pat Coleman

  • D3sports.com Guru
  • Administrator
  • All-American
  • *****
  • Posts: 38569
  • Karma: +4849/-2306
  • Check the front page or FAQs before you ask.
    • View Profile
    • D3sports.com
Re: 2018 NCAA Tournament
« Reply #240 on: March 05, 2018, 03:23:32 pm »
Every time I looked at NWU to consider voting for them, I got stuck on those early games, then combined with the untimely losses at just the wrong time during the season. As a backup voter, I didn't cast a ballot every week, but they didn't get onto mine until the last poll or so.
Publisher. Questions? Check our FAQ for D3f, D3h.
Let's discuss (sports) in a positive way, sometimes kidding each other with no disrespect.

Offline AndOne

  • All-American
  • ******
  • Posts: 6149
  • Karma: +2669/-1277
    • View Profile
Re: 2018 NCAA Tournament
« Reply #241 on: March 05, 2018, 03:40:48 pm »
I believe most of the perceived problem results from an analysis of the non-conference portion of their schedule. Granted, some of their non-con opponents can’t be considered major powers.

Nov. 17   7:30 PM   at North Central (Minn.) (7-18) •   W, 122-84
Nov. 18   5:00 PM   at Northwestern (Minn.) (14-13) •   W, 78-67
Nov. 24   7:00 PM   Iowa Wesleyan (5-20) •   W, 117-54
Nov. 25   5:00 PM   Bethany Lutheran (20-9) •   W, 95-78
Dec. 4   8:00 PM   Doane    W, 107-80
Dec. 10   12:00 PM   at Austin (4-21) •   W, 92-67
Dec. 17   2:00 PM   at Gallaudet (9-17) •   W, 99-77
Dec. 18   7:00 PM   at Marymount (8-17) •   W, 87-46
Dec. 30   4:00 PM   at Grinnell (13-11) •   W, 121-103

Just to put the actual facts here instead of the poor attempt at spin. Good thing the UMAC champ is in here or there wouldn't be anything at all.

(Nobody really begrudges one NAIA opponent, AO.)
Every time I looked at NWU to consider voting for them, I got stuck on those early games, then combined with the untimely losses at just the wrong time during the season. As a backup voter, I didn't cast a ballot every week, but they didn't get onto mine until the last poll or so.

No spin involved.
The fact of the matter is that it’s virtually impossible for NWU to find quality non-con opponents without traveling excessive distances, and likely stressing the budget in the process.
As far as “untimely” losses, would you have given them more credit for a loss at a different time? Isn’t the number of losses more important than when a loss occurred? 🤔
With regard to not voting for a team that’s reached the Sweet Sixteen, it seems the poor attempt at spin isn’t coming from my corner. 😏
You don't always have to win every game. You just have to win the right ones. 😏 (AndOne)

There ain't no good guys, there ain't no bad guys----there's only you and me, and we just disagree. ✌️
(Dave Mason)

You gotta lose 👎, to know how to win. 🏆 (Aerosmith)

So who's the hunter 🐅, .....and who's the game 🐃? (Scandal)

Offline WUPHF

  • All-American
  • ******
  • Posts: 3522
  • Karma: +193/-47
  • Bowling alone
    • View Profile
Re: 2018 NCAA Tournament
« Reply #242 on: March 05, 2018, 03:53:29 pm »
The fact of the matter is that it’s virtually impossible for NWU to find quality non-con opponents without traveling excessive distances, and likely stressing the budget in the process.

I have a little sympathy to their location in the Division III universe, but they did travel to the Twin Cities, Texas and the Washington DC area.  There could be any number of reasons why the chose to play this schedule.  But, they could certainly look to the Quad Cities, Bloomington, Platteville and so on for games as the work on subsequent seasons.

Online Pat Coleman

  • D3sports.com Guru
  • Administrator
  • All-American
  • *****
  • Posts: 38569
  • Karma: +4849/-2306
  • Check the front page or FAQs before you ask.
    • View Profile
    • D3sports.com
Re: 2018 NCAA Tournament
« Reply #243 on: March 05, 2018, 04:20:11 pm »
"Some" of their non-conference opponents can't be considered major powers. Actually, all.

NWU is definitely in the final 16, and beating Aurora and Maryville definitely adds to the resume.
Publisher. Questions? Check our FAQ for D3f, D3h.
Let's discuss (sports) in a positive way, sometimes kidding each other with no disrespect.

Offline sac

  • Hall of Fame
  • All-American
  • ********
  • Posts: 14298
  • Karma: +2674/-2150
  • Rejoice in Hope
    • View Profile
    • Speaking of Alaska - my basketball blog
Re: 2018 NCAA Tournament
« Reply #244 on: March 05, 2018, 04:43:31 pm »
"Some" of their non-conference opponents can't be considered major powers. Actually, all.

NWU is definitely in the final 16, and beating Aurora and Maryville definitely adds to the resume.

Words not often spoken
Give to Hope
Twitter  -- words, occasional words

Online Gregory Sager

  • Hall of Fame
  • All-American
  • ********
  • Posts: 22980
  • Karma: +2658/-851
  • North Park Vikings: Nat'l champs, 1978-79-80-85-87
    • View Profile
Re: 2018 NCAA Tournament
« Reply #245 on: March 05, 2018, 04:46:17 pm »
I had a strong suspicion prior to this season that NebWes was going to be really good, based upon the fact that the Prairie Wolves had all five starters returning from an 18-8 team. However, without any proof at hand that I said that, I suppose that it probably looks like 20/20 hindsight to everybody else. ;)

You weren't the only one to think they'd be pretty good this year. Simply based on returning players, I thought they would win the conference as well. But, winning your conference and gaining national respect can be two different things.

Also, all because there might be a lack of respect, doesn't mean we don't like them! Their opponents to date don't have me declaring them as "favorites". Yes, they blew out their two tournament opponents, but like their non-conference opponents, they hardly scream out "high caliber". Maryville and Aurora come from traditionally weak 1-bid conferences.

Agreed, and I'm on record more than once in pointing out that the IIAC is not a power conference. Even though it's a charter member of D3, it's never had one of its teams reach the Final Four. Nevertheless, you have to take notice of any team that returns all five starters (and its top six scorers) from an 18-8 campaign, one of whom averaged 19.1 ppg and 4 apg (at an almost 2:1 ratio) in 2016-17 (Nate Schimonitz), another of whom averaged 18.5 and 6.8 (Cooper Cook), and a third of whom owned these numbers, 12.7 and 7, last season (Deion Wells-Ross). Those are some serious numbers.

But I knew that I'd have to give them the eyeball test rather than simply rely upon stats. So I've watched them online this season. The Prairie Wolves are good ... really good.

I had a strong suspicion prior to this season that NebWes was going to be really good, based upon the fact that the Prairie Wolves had all five starters returning from an 18-8 team. However, without any proof at hand that I said that, I suppose that it probably looks like 20/20 hindsight to everybody else. ;)

I’ll be your assist man on this one GS. I don’t know exactly where you posted it, but I distinctly remember a pre-season entry in which you opined that NWU would be having a very good season.  ;D

Thanks, Mark!

The fact of the matter is that it’s virtually impossible for NWU to find quality non-con opponents without traveling excessive distances, and likely stressing the budget in the process.

I have a little sympathy to their location in the Division III universe, but they did travel to the Twin Cities, Texas and the Washington DC area.  There could be any number of reasons why the chose to play this schedule.  But, they could certainly look to the Quad Cities, Bloomington, Platteville and so on for games as the work on subsequent seasons.

I'm surprised that we never see NebWes in Chicagoland. It's not that hard to pick up two decent D3 games on a Friday and a Saturday in the Chicago area.
"Talent is God-given. Be humble. Fame is man-given. Be grateful. Conceit is self-given. Be careful..” -- John Wooden

Offline kiko

  • All-Region
  • *****
  • Posts: 1186
  • Karma: +205/-70
    • View Profile
Re: 2018 NCAA Tournament
« Reply #246 on: March 05, 2018, 05:24:33 pm »
Why don't the Titans get any respect on this site?  They were lampooned in the pre-tournament reviews as well.

Congratulations to Illinois Wesleyan 🏀  ;D

He is talking about UW-Oshkosh.

http://www.d3hoops.com/playoffs/men/2018/tournament-preview

I’m aware.
Just a little facetious/tongue-in-cheek humor, and a reminder that there is more than one Titans team. 😏

Of course there's more than one Titans team.  Illinois Wesleyan has a JV team, and a woman's team.  That's two more right there...  ::)

Offline AndOne

  • All-American
  • ******
  • Posts: 6149
  • Karma: +2669/-1277
    • View Profile
Re: 2018 NCAA Tournament
« Reply #247 on: March 05, 2018, 05:42:04 pm »
Why don't the Titans get any respect on this site?  They were lampooned in the pre-tournament reviews as well.

Congratulations to Illinois Wesleyan 🏀  ;D

He is talking about UW-Oshkosh.

http://www.d3hoops.com/playoffs/men/2018/tournament-preview

I’m aware.
Just a little facetious/tongue-in-cheek humor, and a reminder that there is more than one Titans team. 😏

Of course there's more than one Titans team.  Illinois Wesleyan has a JV team, and a woman's team.  That's two more right there...  ::)

::)  is about the only reaction that post is going to elicit, kiko
You don't always have to win every game. You just have to win the right ones. 😏 (AndOne)

There ain't no good guys, there ain't no bad guys----there's only you and me, and we just disagree. ✌️
(Dave Mason)

You gotta lose 👎, to know how to win. 🏆 (Aerosmith)

So who's the hunter 🐅, .....and who's the game 🐃? (Scandal)

Online Pat Coleman

  • D3sports.com Guru
  • Administrator
  • All-American
  • *****
  • Posts: 38569
  • Karma: +4849/-2306
  • Check the front page or FAQs before you ask.
    • View Profile
    • D3sports.com
Re: 2018 NCAA Tournament
« Reply #248 on: March 05, 2018, 05:46:25 pm »
"Some" of their non-conference opponents can't be considered major powers. Actually, all.

NWU is definitely in the final 16, and beating Aurora and Maryville definitely adds to the resume.

Words not often spoken

Speaks volumes about the original resume.
Publisher. Questions? Check our FAQ for D3f, D3h.
Let's discuss (sports) in a positive way, sometimes kidding each other with no disrespect.

Offline Greek Tragedy

  • All-American
  • ******
  • Posts: 12985
  • Karma: +926/-343
  • I'm my dad's mini-me!
    • View Profile
Re: 2018 NCAA Tournament
« Reply #249 on: March 05, 2018, 05:52:48 pm »
A little fun with numbers:

There are 21 Pool C teams.

Pool C teams make up 32.8% of the 64 team field.
Pool C teams are 23-12. I believe there were 7 games where Pool C teams played each other, so take away 7-7 if you will.
Of the 21 Pool C teams, NINE have made the Sweet 16. That's 56% of the remaining field.

5 Pool C teams went 1-1. LeTourneau, CNU, St. Olaf, Wesleyan and Wooster.
7 Pool C teams went 0-1. IWU, NCC, Albright, St. John's, NJCU, Marietta and Brockport.

There are 43 Pool A teams.

28 conferences were represented by only 1 team.
This makes up 43.75% of the field

1 bid leagues went 9-27.
Of these leagues, 22 of the 28 were represented by either their #1 seed or #2 seed team (1st or 2nd placed team).

1 bid leagues represented by seed and record:

16 #1 seeds: 7-15
6 #2 seeds: 2-6
2 #3 seeds: 0-2
3 #3 seeds: 0-3
1 #8 seed: 0-1

The only 1 bid league that has a representative in the Sweet 16 is...Nebraska Wesleyan.

20 of the 28 1-bid leagues went 0-1.

There were 15 leagues that had multiple bids.
The Pool A (AQ) teams of those multi-bid leagues went 16-9

Of those 15 multi-bid leagues, SIX Pool A teams from those leagues are in the Sweet 16: Augustana, MIT, Ramapo, JCU, Plattsburgh and Stevens Point.

Sul Ross St, Augsburg, Lebanon Valley, Whitworth, and Wash U were 0-1

Of the 15 multi-bid leagues, Lebanon Valley, Augsburg and Whitworth were NOT the #1 seeds in their conference tourneys but won to get the Pool A bid. Williams wasn't the #1 seed, but tied for 1st with four other NESCAC teams.


So, you could argue that conferences that have multi-bids are stronger conferences with only 1 bid. 15 of the 16 teams in the Sweet 16 are from conferences with more than one bid.

In soccer, 4 confederations have 1/2 bids, meaning one confederation plays another to earn an extra bid to the World Cup. For example, the 4th place CONCACAF played the 5th place team in Asia for the right to go to the World Cup. In addition, the 5th place team in South America played the winner of the Oceania Confederation for a spot in the World Cup.

So, my point is that, based on this season's findings, and probably a historical trend, many of these 1-bid leagues don't have the quality of some of the multi-bid leagues.

My (fake) proposal would be to have a conference play-off for some 1-bid leagues where the winners would get a bid into the NCAA tournament and open up more spots for Pool C teams, likely 3rd to 5th best teams in "Power Conferences." So, the NCAA comes up with a formula to determine bottom 10 conferences that receive AQs. Those 10 conferences are drawn into 5 games with the winners getting the 5 AQs, opening up 5 more Pool C bids.

For example, the NCAA actually picks 26 Pool C teams, knowing 5 spots will open up after the inter-conference playoffs. The bottom 10 conferences are drawn into 5 games...

NEAC v NAC
NECC v PAC
SKY v SAA
SCIAC v SCAC
SLIAC v AMCC

(note: I just randomly picked 10 1-bid conferences as an example)

Or you could have the bottom 1-bid conference winners play the bottom 10 Pool C teams in a play-in round to see who gets into the field of 64.
Pointers
Breed of a Champion
2004, 2005, 2010 and 2015 National Champions

Fantasy Leagues Commissioner

TGHIJGSTO!!!

Offline Smitty Oom

  • All-Region
  • *****
  • Posts: 1352
  • Karma: +131/-20
    • View Profile
Re: 2018 NCAA Tournament
« Reply #250 on: March 05, 2018, 06:22:37 pm »
My (fake) proposal would be to have a conference play-off for some 1-bid leagues where the winners would get a bid into the NCAA tournament and open up more spots for Pool C teams, likely 3rd to 5th best teams in "Power Conferences." So, the NCAA comes up with a formula to determine bottom 10 conferences that receive AQs. Those 10 conferences are drawn into 5 games with the winners getting the 5 AQs, opening up 5 more Pool C bids.

For example, the NCAA actually picks 26 Pool C teams, knowing 5 spots will open up after the inter-conference playoffs. The bottom 10 conferences are drawn into 5 games...

NEAC v NAC
NECC v PAC
SKY v SAA
SCIAC v SCAC
SLIAC v AMCC

(note: I just randomly picked 10 1-bid conferences as an example)

Or you could have the bottom 1-bid conference winners play the bottom 10 Pool C teams in a play-in round to see who gets into the field of 64.

Thanks for running the numbers, Greek. Very interesting!

So basically you would like a 68 team tournament, like the NCAA DI bracket does it. I would really like that, as you could take 8 of the weaker Pool A resumes and put them into a "play-in" or "first round" game like the some of 16 seeds do it in D1. Would be nice to get more Pool C teams in which have a real shot at making it far in the tourney (a la Springfield this year, who was likely the last team into the field of 64).

With that said, I think this was brought up on a Hoopsville and the logistics probably wouldn't hold up. Would be more expensive for starters. Teams would have to miss school for the majority of the week, which goes against the spirit of D3. Also, when do you stop adding teams?

I am a fan of the 68 team bracket, I just don't think it will happen anytime soon, unfortunately.

PS I know you probably understand the drawbacks of your (fake) proposal, just highlighting them in the post. 

Offline Ralph Turner

  • Hall of Fame
  • All-American
  • ********
  • Posts: 28683
  • Karma: +1803/-390
  • Hall of Famer
    • View Profile
Re: 2018 NCAA Tournament
« Reply #251 on: March 05, 2018, 09:13:00 pm »
A little fun with numbers:

There are 21 Pool C teams.

Pool C teams make up 32.8% of the 64 team field.
Pool C teams are 23-12. I believe there were 7 games where Pool C teams played each other, so take away 7-7 if you will.
Of the 21 Pool C teams, NINE have made the Sweet 16. That's 56% of the remaining field.

5 Pool C teams went 1-1. LeTourneau, CNU, St. Olaf, Wesleyan and Wooster.
7 Pool C teams went 0-1. IWU, NCC, Albright, St. John's, NJCU, Marietta and Brockport.

There are 43 Pool A teams.

28 conferences were represented by only 1 team.
This makes up 43.75% of the field

1 bid leagues went 9-27.
Of these leagues, 22 of the 28 were represented by either their #1 seed or #2 seed team (1st or 2nd placed team).

1 bid leagues represented by seed and record:

16 #1 seeds: 7-15
6 #2 seeds: 2-6
2 #3 seeds: 0-2
3 #3 seeds: 0-3
1 #8 seed: 0-1

The only 1 bid league that has a representative in the Sweet 16 is...Nebraska Wesleyan.

20 of the 28 1-bid leagues went 0-1.

There were 15 leagues that had multiple bids.
The Pool A (AQ) teams of those multi-bid leagues went 16-9

Of those 15 multi-bid leagues, SIX Pool A teams from those leagues are in the Sweet 16: Augustana, MIT, Ramapo, JCU, Plattsburgh and Stevens Point.

Sul Ross St, Augsburg, Lebanon Valley, Whitworth, and Wash U were 0-1

Of the 15 multi-bid leagues, Lebanon Valley, Augsburg and Whitworth were NOT the #1 seeds in their conference tourneys but won to get the Pool A bid. Williams wasn't the #1 seed, but tied for 1st with four other NESCAC teams.


So, you could argue that conferences that have multi-bids are stronger conferences with only 1 bid. 15 of the 16 teams in the Sweet 16 are from conferences with more than one bid.

In soccer, 4 confederations have 1/2 bids, meaning one confederation plays another to earn an extra bid to the World Cup. For example, the 4th place CONCACAF played the 5th place team in Asia for the right to go to the World Cup. In addition, the 5th place team in South America played the winner of the Oceania Confederation for a spot in the World Cup.

So, my point is that, based on this season's findings, and probably a historical trend, many of these 1-bid leagues don't have the quality of some of the multi-bid leagues.

My (fake) proposal would be to have a conference play-off for some 1-bid leagues where the winners would get a bid into the NCAA tournament and open up more spots for Pool C teams, likely 3rd to 5th best teams in "Power Conferences." So, the NCAA comes up with a formula to determine bottom 10 conferences that receive AQs. Those 10 conferences are drawn into 5 games with the winners getting the 5 AQs, opening up 5 more Pool C bids.

For example, the NCAA actually picks 26 Pool C teams, knowing 5 spots will open up after the inter-conference playoffs. The bottom 10 conferences are drawn into 5 games...

NEAC v NAC
NECC v PAC
SKY v SAA
SCIAC v SCAC
SLIAC v AMCC

(note: I just randomly picked 10 1-bid conferences as an example)

Or you could have the bottom 1-bid conference winners play the bottom 10 Pool C teams in a play-in round to see who gets into the field of 64.
+1!  I like the analysis of the conferences.  I will keep this post in mind.

These games substantiate the post by (was it) Fantastic 50 that we have the Top 40 teams in the country plus another 24 AQ's

Offline Greek Tragedy

  • All-American
  • ******
  • Posts: 12985
  • Karma: +926/-343
  • I'm my dad's mini-me!
    • View Profile
Re: 2018 NCAA Tournament
« Reply #252 on: March 05, 2018, 11:39:38 pm »
Speaking of buzzer beaters...

http://www.totalprosports.com/2018/03/03/new-york-hs-b-ball-team-hits-crazy-buzzer-beater-from-34-court-to-win-state-title-video/

It looks like he travels from the video in the stands. On the floor video, he does dribble the ball once...still could be called a travel, possibly. Great shot, nonetheless.
Pointers
Breed of a Champion
2004, 2005, 2010 and 2015 National Champions

Fantasy Leagues Commissioner

TGHIJGSTO!!!

Offline smedindy

  • All-American
  • ******
  • Posts: 10224
  • Karma: +1103/-918
  • ‘Heliotrope, Hell!’ orated he: ‘We want blood!’
    • View Profile
    • Music reviews for one and all, or me at least.
Re: 2018 NCAA Tournament
« Reply #253 on: March 06, 2018, 01:47:38 am »
I hate the idea that any conference winner would be excluded from the tourney. Now, if a 1-bid league wants to enhance its chances, it may wish to not have a tourney so the champ gets in automatically.

I also abhor the fact that two of the 'play-in' games in the D1 tourney are 16-seeds. Let them in, and have the last eight at large teams battle it out.

Offline spwood

  • Second-stringer
  • **
  • Posts: 164
  • Karma: +8/-1
    • View Profile
Re: 2018 NCAA Tournament
« Reply #254 on: March 06, 2018, 06:56:23 am »
I hate the idea that any conference winner would be excluded from the tourney. Now, if a 1-bid league wants to enhance its chances, it may wish to not have a tourney so the champ gets in automatically.

I also abhor the fact that two of the 'play-in' games in the D1 tourney are 16-seeds. Let them in, and have the last eight at large teams battle it out.

I'm all for this!  I'd rather make all the 12 seeds (the 16-12 ACC or SEC teams squeaking in because we need to fill the bracket) play those elimination games instead of the conference champion 16 seeds.  That said, the play-in gives those 16 seeds the opportunity to win a game in the NCAA tourney!